Contact with nature is widely considered to ameliorate psychological stress, but the empirical support for a causal link is limited. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize and critically assess the evidence. Six electronic databases were searched. Twenty-six studies evaluated the difference between the effect of natural environments and that of a suitable control on the acute psychophysiological stress response. Eighteen studies were rated as being of moderate quality, four studies of low quality, and four studies of high quality. Meta-analyses indicated that seated relaxation (g = .5, p = .06) and walking (g = .3, p = .02) in natural environments enhanced heart rate variability more than the same activities in control conditions. Cortisol concentration measures were inconsistent. While intuitively and theoretically sound, the empirical support for acute stress-reducing effects of immersion in natural environments is tentative due to small sample sizes and methodological weaknesses in the studies. We provide guidelines for future research.

In this systematic review, we summarized and evaluated the evidence for effects of, and associations between, immersive nature-experience on mental, physical, and social health promotion outcomes. Immersive nature-experience was operationalized as non-competitive activities, both sedentary and active, occurring in natural environments removed from everyday environments. We defined health according to the World Health Organization's holistic and positive definition of health and included steady-state, intermediate, and health promotion outcomes. An electronic search was performed for Danish, English, German, Norwegian, and Swedish articles published between January 2004 and May 2017. Manual approaches, e.g., bibliographies from experts, supplemented the literature search. Data were extracted from 461 publications that met the inclusion criteria. To assess the status and quality of the evidence for health promotion effects of immersive nature-experience, we focused on the subset of studies based on controlled designs (n = 133). Outcome level quality of the evidence was assessed narratively. Interventions most often involved adventure-based activities, short-termed walking, and seated relaxation in natural environments. We found positive effects on a range of health promotion outcomes grouped under psychological wellbeing (n = 97; ≈55% positive; ≈13% mixed; ≈29% non-significant; 2% negative); psychosocial function (n = 67; ≈61% positive; ≈9% mixed; ≈30% non-significant); psychophysiological stress response (n = 50; ≈58% positive; ≈18% mixed; ≈24% non-significant), and cognitive performance (n = 36; ≈58% positive; ≈6% mixed; ≈33% non-significant; 3% negative); and social skills and relationships (n = 34; ≈70% positive; ≈7% mixed; ≈22% non-significant). Findings related to outcomes categorized under physical health, e.g., risk of cardiovascular disease, were less consistent (n = 51; ≈37% positive; ≈28% mixed; ≈35% non-significant). Across the types of interventions and outcomes, the quality of the evidence was deemed low and occasionally moderate. In the review, we identify, discuss, and present possible solutions to four core methodological challenges associated with investigating immersive nature-experience and health outcomes: (1) intervention and program complexity; (2) feasibility and desirability of randomization; (3) blinding of participants and researchers; and (4) transferability and generalizability. The results of the review have been published as a popular-scientific report and a scientific research overview, both in Danish language.

Despite structural and cultural similarities across the Nordic countries, differences in cancer survival remain. With a focus on similarities and differences between the Nordic countries, we invest...

During the COVID-19 pandemic, teleconsultations (TC) have been increasingly used in cancer care as an alternative to outpatient visits. We aimed to examine patient-related and cancer-specific chara...

Background: Reduced relative dose intensity (RDI) of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with breast cancer may compromise treatment outcome and survival. We examined patient-related characteristics associated with treatment modifications and suboptimal RDI and tumour response in patients with breast cancer. Methods: In this observational study, electronic medical records were reviewed retrospectively for female patients with breast cancer scheduled for NACT at a university hospital in Denmark between 2017 and 2019. The RDI (ratio of delivered dose intensity in relation to standard dose intensity) was calculated. Multivariate logistic regression analyses examined associations of sociodemographics, general health and clinical cancer characteristics with dose reductions, dose delays, discontinuation of NACT and suboptimal RDI < 85%. Results: Among 122 included patients, 43%, 42% and 28% experienced dose reductions, dose delays ≥3 days and discontinuation, respectively. A total of 25% received an RDI < 85%. Comorbidity, taking long-term medications and being overweight were statistically significantly associated with treatment modifications, while age ≥ 65 years and comorbidity were associated with RDI < 85%. Around one third of all patients had radiologic (36%) or pathologic (35%) complete tumour response, with no statistically significant differences by RDI < or ≥85% irrespective of breast cancer subtype. Conclusions: While most patients had RDI ≥85%, still one out of four patients received an RDI < 85%. Further investigations of possible supportive care initiatives to improve patients’ treatment tolerability are needed, particularly among subgroups of older age or with comorbidity.