Introduction: Greenspaces can provide an important resource for human mental health. A growing body of literature investigates the interaction and the influence of diverse greenspace exposures. In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the complex connection between greenspace and mental health, a variety of perspectives and methodological combinations are needed. The aim of this review is to assess the current methodologies researching greenspace and mental health.Methods: A scoping review was conducted. Four electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science) were searched for relevant studies. A wide range of greenspace and mental health keywords were included to provide a comprehensive representation of the body of research. Relevant information on publication characteristics, types of greenspaces, mental health outcomes, and measurements of greenspace exposure and mental health was extracted and assessed.Results: 338 studies were included. The included studies encompassed a multitude of methods, as well as outcomes for both greenspace and mental health. 28 combinations were found between seven categories each for greenspace and mental health assessment. Some pairings such as geoinformation systems for greenspace assessment and questionnaires investigating mental health were used much more frequently than others, implying possible research gaps. Furthermore, we identified problems and inconsistences in reporting of greenspace types and mental health outcomes.Discussion: The identified methodological variety is a potential for researching the complex connections between greenspace and mental health. Commonly used combinations can provide important insights. However, future research needs to emphasize other perspectives in order to understand how to create living environments with mental health benefits. For this purpose, interdisciplinary research is necessary.

Urban residency is associated with exposure to environmental factors, which can influence health in many ways. Neuroscientific research, as well as Public Health research, aim towards broadening evidence in the field of Urban Health. However, it is unclear whether the association between urban living and mental illnesses is causal rather than explainable by other selective effects. This review seeks to gather information on the current evidence regarding urban living and neurological outcomes to demonstrate how Public Health and Neuroscience could complement each other in the field of Urban Health. A scoping review was conducted in four electronic databases according to the PRISMA-statement guidelines. 25 empirical studies were included. Outcomes such as schizophrenia and psychotic disorders, social and cognitive functioning were scrutinised. Evidence was found for alteration of brain functioning and brain structure. Most studies researching cognitive functioning or cognitive decline displayed possible protective effects of urban living compared to rural living. The different study designs in Public Health and Neuroscience could profit from each other. Although the comparability of studies is limited by the inconsistent assessments of urbanity. Synergies and potentials to combine aspects of Public Health and Neuroscience in the field of Urban Health to improve population health became apparent.

Given the ongoing trend of urbanization and the increased prevalence of specific mental disorders in urban settings, there is a need to better understand the link between urban living and mental health. Recent advances in urban mental health research have leveraged mobile electroencephalography to explore how brain electrical signals are influenced by urban stressors and resources. This study aims to synthesize the evidence from mobile electroencephalography measurements in the context of urban mental health. A systematic literature research was conducted in the databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL in September 2023. The present review includes primary studies that used in-situ electroencephalography in real urban environments published since 2013. Four independent reviewers conducted the screening, while two researchers performed data extraction using Microsoft Excel and assessed risk of bias using the Effective Public Healthcare Panacea Project Quality Assessment Tool. The review has been pre-registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Review (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD42023471636. Fifteen studies were identified, primarily examining power in alpha, beta, and theta frequencies in urban areas compared to less urbanized environments. Study findings exhibited significant heterogeneity; while some studies noted heightened brain activity in urban environments, others observed reductions compared to less urbanized or greener regions. Notably, certain demographic cohorts, such as adolescents, have been understudied. Moreover, descriptions of exposures were often inadequate for ensuring replicability, and gender considerations were seldom integrated into analyses. This systematic review provides insights into an emerging field of research which appears to be suffering from small sample sizes and a lack of methodological transparency and consistency. Interpretation of the seemingly contradictory results requires future studies to be more rigorous in documenting urban exposures and choice of brain components under investigation.