Table 2.

Outcomes and effects by study.

N°	Author/Year	Outcomes and Effects
1	Lee & Lee, 2014 [32]	→Decreased blood pressure in the forest group →Improved lung function in the forest group →The urban group did not undergo significant changes.
2	Mao et al., 2012 [18]	→After seven days, there was a reduction in blood pressure. →After seven days, there was a reduction in IL-6 and ET-1. →Reduction of the negative subscales of the POMS questionnaire.
3	Szczepańska-Gieracha et al., 2021 [33]	→The VR group, after eight sessions, showed a reduction in their score of the Geriatric Depression Scale-GDS 30. →Reduction in stress and anxiety in the VR group.
4	Yeo et al., 2020 [34]	→Improvement in cognitive decline and agitation in the intervention group. →Increase in the level of empathy and feeling of happiness in the volunteers of the intervention group. →Improved performance of activities of daily living, sleep, and quality of life.
5	Roe et al., 2020 [35]	→Lower heart rate variability in the gray urban group, which indicates higher cardiac activation and higher stress. →Accessible urban green areas offer promising opportunities for the health of older people.
6	Wu et al., 2020 [36]	→Reduced anxiety, depression, tension, fatigue, and confusion in the forest bathing group. →Reduction in the level of diastolic blood pressure. →Reduction in C-reactive protein level in the forest group.
7	Pedrinolla et al., 2019 [37]	→Significant improvement in the intervention group’s score on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Scale. →Reduction in quetiapine dosage for the intervention group after the activity. →Mini Mental State Examination score was significantly better in the intervention group. →Diastolic blood pressure was lower in the intervention group. →Reduction in salivary cortisol level compared to the control group.
8	Fraser et al., 2020 [38]	→Mixed results were found regarding quality of life, no significant effect was found for depression. →Due to the limited number of studies eligible for inclusion and the heterogeneity of outcome measures, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions.
9	Jia et al., 2016 [39]	→In the forest group, they found significantly decreased perforin and granzyme B expressions, with decreased levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines and stress hormones. →Negative subscale scores of the Profile of Mood State questionnaire—POMS decreased after the forest bathing walk. →In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, reduced inflammation and stress level.
10	Mao et al., 2018 [40]	→After the second 4-day forest bathing trip, decline in heart failure biomarkers and attenuation of inflammatory response and oxidative stress was observed.
11	Mao et al., 2017 [41]	→Forest group subjects showed a significant reduction in brain natriuretic peptide. →Cardiovascular disease-related values in individuals exposed to the forest environment compared to the urban control group. →Reduced level of inflammatory cytokines and improved antioxidant function were observed in the forest group. →POMS indicated that negative emotional mood state was alleviated after intervention.
12	Yi et al., 2019 [42]	→Both Breathing Program and Walking Program brought health benefits to the elderly population in terms of neurophysiology, heart rate variability, and bioimpedance. Beneficial effects varied depending on the characteristics of the FTPs and the types of CS. →In the study, BP was effective in increasing the phase angle of the upper limbs, and WP was effective in increasing the phase angle of the lower limbs. →WP elevated parasympathetic nervous system activity in TE-type participants. →BP was beneficial in increasing alpha or beta wave powers in type SE, and WP was effective in increasing beta wave power for type SY.