Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Urban Green Spaces (UGSs) are essential for ecological sustainability and public health, offering benefits such as air pollution reduction, urban cooling, and recreational opportunities. However, existing evaluation tools remain inconsistent, often assessing isolated dimensions like accessibility or aesthetics without fully integrating health considerations. A systematic approach is needed to understand how these tools measure UGS quality and their relevance to health outcomes. This study employs a literature review (PRISMA framework) to analyze UGS evaluation tools with a focus on quality and health implications. A search in Scopus and Web of Science identified 14 relevant studies. Data extraction examined tool structure, assessed dimensions, data collection methods, geographic applications, and integration of health indicators. The review identified 13 distinct tools varying in complexity and methodology, from standardized checklists to GIS-based analyses. While key dimensions included accessibility, safety, aesthetics, and biodiversity, health-related factors were inconsistently integrated. Few tools explicitly assessed physical, mental, or social health outcomes. Technological innovations, such as Google Street View and AI-based analysis, emerged as enhancements for UGS evaluation. Despite methodological advances, gaps remain in linking UGS quality assessments to health outcomes. The lack of standardized health metrics limits applicability in urban planning. Future research should focus on interdisciplinary frameworks integrating environmental and health indicators to support the creation of sustainable and health-promoting UGS.
Rebecchi et al. (Wed,) studied this question.