Integrating BWM and modified VIKOR for age-friendly community park assessment in the context of mental health

Background: Late-life depression is a growing public health challenge in aging societies. Community parks are increasingly recognized as protective environments, yet evidence on which specific attributes most effectively alleviate depression among older adults remains limited.

Methods: This study proposed a hybrid framework combining the Best-Worst Method (BWM) and a Modified VIKOR approach. Eight criteria (Access points, Pathways, Facilities for different activities, Open space, Amenities, Natural features, Sunlight, Incivilities) were identified through literature review. Twenty-three experts conducted BWM pairwise comparisons, with 13 valid responses retained after consistency checks. Nine community parks in Zhuhai, China, were then evaluated using gap scores and ranked via Modified VIKOR.

Results: The evaluation revealed that open space (16.26%), facilities for different activities (14.27%), and public amenities (13.50%) were the most influential in reducing depression risk. Rankings showed notable disparities among the nine parks. Improvement priorities focused on expanding spaces for exercise and social interaction, upgrading seating, lighting, and waste facilities, and gradually enhancing vegetation and environmental order. Access and pathway conditions were generally adequate, requiring only localized adjustments.

Conclusion: Community park environments contribute to late-life depression alleviation through differentiated mechanisms. The BWM-Modified VIKOR framework provides an evidence-based tool for prioritizing age-friendly park renovations under limited resources. Priority should be given to upgrading activity facilities, open spaces, and amenities.

1 Introduction

The global population is undergoing rapid aging (1). According to United Nations projections, by 2050, individuals aged 60 and above will account for 21.5% of the global population, reaching 2.1 billion (2). As aging accelerates, the associated health burden is also intensifying (3, 4). Among these, depression is one of the most prevalent mental disorders in older adults, often triggered by limitations in physical, emotional, cognitive, and sensory functions that lead to disability (5, 6). In addition, physiological decline, role transitions such as retirement and widowhood, and insufficient self-care among those living alone substantially increase the risk of depression (7, 8). However, late-life depression is often misinterpreted as normal aging or an acceptable stress response, delaying recognition and intervention (9). Consequently, the prevalence of depression and suicide among older adults remains high and continues to rise (8, 10). These outcomes are symptomatic of multiple comorbid health problems, typically manifested as anhedonia, insomnia, appetite loss, and even cognitive changes (9, 11). Such conditions not only severely impair individual wellbeing but also impose a sustained burden on healthcare systems (10). In China, late-life depression is particularly shaped by cultural and familial structures. Concerns about becoming a burden to the family often exacerbate anxiety, while large urban–rural disparities result in limited awareness and expression of mental disorders (12).

This phenomenon is not confined to the individual level but is closely tied to the social environment and structural factors (13). These exert profound influences on the mental health of older adults, especially under the pressures of rapid urbanization (14). Restricted mobility due to physical conditions, low adaptability to the environment, and inadequate external social support often delay responses to high-risk contexts (8, 15). Hence, urban environments play a vital role in mitigating depression among older populations. Within this context, landscape ecology emphasizes the regulatory effects of external environmental features, particularly the physical environment (8).

Empirical evidence has demonstrated that exposure to greenery and natural environments offers varying degrees of psychological benefits for older adults (16–19). These effects are primarily realized through experiences at both psychological and behavioral levels. In environmental psychology, the Stress Recovery Theory (SRT) and Attention Restoration Theory (ART) have been widely employed to explain such restorative mechanisms (20, 21). SRT posits that elderly individuals experience emotional relief and mental relaxation in tranquil park spaces, where the safe and gentle atmosphere of nature helps alleviate stress and mitigate negative emotions such as depression (22, 23). ART, on the other hand, suggests that park environments provide opportunities for individuals to withdraw from daily hassles and engage in softly fascinating experiences, allowing older adults to restore their attentional capacities depleted by prolonged tension, thereby regaining calmness and positive affect through effortless perception and exploration (19).

Beyond psychological restoration, natural environments also exert compound effects on social interaction and physical activity. Specifically, parks provide venues for gatherings and social contact among older adults, strengthening social support networks and effectively reducing feelings of loneliness and depression (24, 25). Meanwhile, natural settings promote physical activity, which produces indirect benefits—green exercise, walking, and leisure participation not only enhance physical functioning and engagement but also reinforce cognitive performance and immune responses (20, 21). Together, these mechanisms form an integrated system in which emotional restoration, social bonding, and activity motivation interact synergistically. Among the diverse urban green space typologies, neighborhood-level green areas that are easily accessible and integrated into daily life have been increasingly recognized for their potential to support mental wellbeing in aging populations (26).

With technological progress and changes in residential forms, green spaces in some Asian cities have evolved into diverse configurations comprising public, semi-public, and private domains (27, 28). Within this context, community parks—typically small or medium-sized green spaces located within residential neighborhoods and primarily serving nearby residents—represent an important typology in the Asian urban park system (29). Owing to their proximity and environmental quality, these parks serve as the main medium for daily contact with nature (30). Their high accessibility transforms human–nature interaction from an occasional occurrence into a habitual experience, subtly buffering life stress and emotional burdens (8, 31). Furthermore, their open and shared spatial attributes provide individuals with opportunities for social interaction and companionship, thereby preventing the accumulation of isolation (32). The functional design and low entry threshold of such parks further ensure active participation of elderly users, enhancing their sense of self-efficacy and overall quality of life (33). Through this intertwined relationship among natural environment, social connection, and behavioral practice, community parks not only compensate for the absence of private green spaces but also demonstrate a unique and irreplaceable value in alleviating and improving late-life depression.

Despite their potential value, research focusing on the role of community parks in supporting older adults' mental health remains limited (34–38). Most existing studies emphasize overall urban greenness or general perceptions of residents, while empirical evidence concerning community parks in high-density urban settings and their relationship to geriatric depression is still scarce (39–42). Current research often relies on single indicators such as green coverage, accessibility, or visual greenery, lacking a comprehensive understanding of the parks' physical environmental characteristics. In particular, the relative influence and improvement priorities of different spatial features, such as open space configuration, facility maintenance, path connectivity, and sensory design, within specific cultural contexts have not been systematically explored.

Moreover, many existing assessments employ simple additive models based on fixed-weight audit tools, such as the Neighborhood Green Space Tool (NGST) (43). Although such instruments can provide an overall evaluation of environmental quality, their predetermined weights often fail to reflect socio-cultural or spatial contextual variations, thereby reducing the practical and policy relevance of the results (43–45). In recent years, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approaches based on expert judgment have attracted increasing attention in urban environmental evaluation (42, 43, 46). By incorporating multidisciplinary expert knowledge into the weighting process, MCDM methods can better account for contextual diversity, resulting in more targeted and applicable outcomes. However, applications of such methods to the intersection of community park evaluation and late-life depression remain scarce.

To address these gaps, this study establishes an integrated evaluation framework centered on the BWM and Modified VIKOR approach. Environmental criteria of community parks were derived through literature review, followed by weight determination using BWM and comprehensive ranking and diagnosis of nine community parks in Zhuhai City using Modified VIKOR. The BWM is characterized by structural simplicity, low data requirements, and computational efficiency, while the Modified VIKOR method, grounded in the principle of compromise programming, balances overall performance with individual weaknesses through reference to an ideal solution—revealing both global advantages and priority areas for improvement (47, 48).

In summary, this research develops a BWM–Modified VIKOR–based framework that bridges the theoretical and methodological gap between community park environmental features and elderly depression studies. The proposed model not only expands the analytical perspective at the intersection of geriatric health and urban design but also provides a practically oriented evaluation tool and decision reference for optimizing age-friendly community parks.

2 Literature review

2.1 Evaluation of physical environmental quality in parks

In the evaluation of physical environmental quality in parks, a range of objective audit tools have been developed, such as the Community Park Audit Tool (CPAT), Public Open Space Desktop Auditing Tool (POSDAT), Environmental Assessment of Public Recreation Spaces (EAPRS), and PARK Tool (49–53). These instruments, however, were largely designed based on the spatial morphology of low-density Western cities and typically rely on fixed-weight scoring systems to quantify the physical environment (49, 54–56). In the context of high-density and culturally diverse Asian cities, such tools fail to adequately capture the complex spatial configurations and diversified user needs that characterize local urban settings. Moreover, the use of simple additive weighting to generate composite scores often results in descriptive assessments rather than decision-oriented analyses, thereby limiting their capacity to inform strategic planning and spatial optimization for park improvement.

To overcome these limitations, recent studies have introduced MCDM frameworks to enhance both the adaptability and decision-oriented nature of evaluation models. These approaches incorporate expert judgment, enabling a more context-sensitive assessment of complex environments and cultural variations. For example, the AHP–TOPSIS framework ranks park alternatives based on normalized data and has been applied to examine the relationship between urban green space quality and visitors' psychological wellbeing (57). Meanwhile, the DEMATEL–DANP–VIKOR system integrates inter-attribute relationships to uncover the formation mechanisms of perceived restorative capacity, identifying critical pathways that influence recovery experience and emphasizing a systemic and compromise-oriented perspective (58). Srdjevic et al. (36) further compared the applicability and stability of AHP and BWM in park quality evaluation, concluding that BWM demonstrates higher consistency and computational efficiency in weight assignment (36). Other studies have employed the DANP–Modified VIKOR model to develop continuous improvement strategies for public open spaces, identifying key influencing factors and proposing optimization pathways for age-friendly park environments (59). Similarly, Li et al. integrated rough set theory to analyze combinational scenarios of urban green landscape features, identifying landscape element configurations that positively contribute to the perceived recovery of individuals with depressive symptoms (60).

Taken together, these approaches highlight complementary advantages: BWM excels in reducing cognitive burden and enhancing robustness during the weighting process (61), whereas Modified VIKOR offers dynamic compromise and multi-objective balancing capabilities, revealing the potential for improvement across psychological health dimensions (59). However, research integrating both methods remains scarce—particularly in the context of evaluating elderly-oriented park environments from a mental health perspective—indicating an urgent need for further exploration in this domain.

2.2 Construction of evaluation framework

To ensure the reliability and contextual relevance of the proposed indicator system, this study followed a three-step process:

(a) Selection of a baseline audit framework

The NGST was chosen as the basis for community park audits for the following reasons. First, audit tools that do not specifically incorporate older adults, such as QUINPY (56) and PARK (49), were excluded. Second, in this study, community parks are defined as small-scale open green spaces surrounding residential neighborhoods and serving local residents (also referred to as “neighborhood green spaces”). These parks differ from large-scale urban parks and other public spaces in terms of both experiential attributes and facility configurations (62, 63). Consequently, design tools that are unsuitable for small-scale community parks, such as RECITAL (55) and NEST (54), were excluded.

(b) Empirical validation and theoretical justification

Evidence from multiple studies across Europe, Asia, and North America consistently demonstrates that urban parks play a vital role in relieving depressive symptoms, fostering positive emotions, and improving mental health (64–66). Specifically, several spatial attributes have been repeatedly linked to psychological outcomes:

Access Points: Well-distributed park entrances not only shorten walking distances and enhance accessibility but also promote more frequent and spontaneous park visits, which are crucial for sustaining psychological wellbeing among older adults. Improved accessibility reduces perceived physical barriers, thereby lowering psychological stress and the risk of mood disorders (67, 68).

Pathways: Park pathways serve as both functional and psychological corridors that facilitate walking, slow movement, and meditative activities known to regulate emotions and alleviate depressive symptoms. Wide, flat, and well-equipped walkways provide a sense of safety and continuity, encouraging longer stays and repetitive use, which reinforce the restorative benefits of nature exposure. Beyond mobility, the design quality of paths—such as surface texture, shading, and visual enclosure—plays a pivotal role in shaping emotional regulation and perceived tranquility (69, 70).

Open Spaces: Studies indicate that larger park areas are generally associated with lower depression risk, although this benefit weakens when non-vegetated areas (e.g., sports courts) occupy a high proportion (64). Moderate spatial complexity and higher green patch density foster positive emotions (8), whereas excessive visual or structural complexity may reduce dwell time and weaken restorative effects (71). Parks with clear landscape layering and balanced vegetation stimulate relaxation and calmness (72), while excessive clearing in pursuit of tidiness or safety can diminish naturalness and biodiversity, thereby undermining psychological restoration (73).

Facilities for Different Activities: The quantity and quality of exercise equipment are directly related to older adults' sense of safety and improvement in depressive symptoms. Well-maintained facilities and clearly defined park edges not only reduce perceived risks but also help slow the progression of depressive tendencies (71, 74).

Amenities and Natural features: Well-maintained benches, pavilions, toilets, lighting, and signage alleviate monotony and increase perceived comfort, while rich vegetation, water features, and flowering plants help individuals temporarily detach from negative emotions, prolong stays, and enhance restoration (71, 74).

Incivilities: Accessibility, non-slip surfaces, proper waste management, clear boundaries, and good maintenance improve perceived safety and reduce depressive tendencies, whereas derelict buildings, noise, and vandalism may exacerbate psychological distress (71, 75–79).

(c) Refinement and supplementation of criteria

Building upon NGST, the criteria system was revised and expanded based on recent empirical findings. Following the work of Li et al. (60) two additional criteria were incorporated: public art or installation (under the Amenities criterion) and sunlight.

Public art or installation contributes to depression alleviation through both physiological mechanisms (e.g., endorphin release and aesthetic pleasure) and social mechanisms (e.g., promoting social interaction and communication skills) (80). Adequate Sunlight exposure influences behavior patterns in nuanced ways: strong daylight encourages outdoor observation and engagement with nature, while softer lighting environments foster intimate conversation—both contributing to emotional stability and reduced depression risk (71, 81).

At the same time, criteria such as Pedestrian Crossings or Shortcuts were not included in the core framework due to the current lack of direct empirical evidence linking them to mental health outcomes among older adults. Nonetheless, prior studies at the macro level have confirmed that such elements are indeed associated with walking accessibility, safety, and psychological wellbeing (82), and should therefore be considered in future extensions of the model.

Based on this literature review, the present study constructed a measurement scale to assess the effects of community park environments on depression alleviation among older adults, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Table 1. Criteria for evaluating community parks.

3 Methods and materials

This study employed the BWM–Modified VIKOR model, a MCDM approach. The research process consisted of three main stages. In the first stage, a literature review was conducted to extract eight evaluation criteria from the physical environmental features of community parks that may influence the alleviation of depression among older adults. In the second stage, the BWM was applied to determine criteria weights. Experts compared the relative importance of the ‘best' and ‘worst' criteria to calculate the weights of all criteria. In the third stage, the Modified VIKOR method was employed to conduct a comprehensive evaluation and ranking of nine representative community park cases. Accordingly, a comprehensive evaluation framework was established to assess the potential of community parks in alleviating depression among older adults, based on expert experiential judgment. The overall methodological framework is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Methodology framework.

3.1 Empirical case

The empirical study selected nine community parks in Xiangzhou District, Zhuhai, as research objects. In this district, the proportion of residents aged 60 years and above has exceeded one-tenth of the total population and continues to grow (83). At the same time, Zhuhai has implemented a specialized plan for elderly care services, promoting the concept of ‘community-based, nearby elderly care', with an emphasis on environmental optimization, greening, and age-friendly renovation. This reflects the urgent demand for high-quality public spaces (84). Against this background, nine representative cases with appropriate heterogeneity were deliberately selected, covering a broad spectrum of community parks in terms of scale and performance distribution across multiple criteria. These cases are therefore suitable for demonstrating the applicability of the proposed evaluation framework.

During data collection, domain experts were recruited to complete both the BWM questionnaire and the park criteria evaluation survey in August 2025. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (a) a relevant background in urban planning and design, public health, environmental psychology, or public art, along with adequate expertise in community park design and geriatric psychology; (b) a master's degree or above in a related field; and (c) practical or academic experience related to community parks, geriatric medicine, or similar topics, including participation in related projects or publications. In total, 23 experts were recruited, and their demographic and professional characteristics are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2

Table 2. Profile of participating experts.

All 23 experts completed the BWM questionnaire. A relatively strict consistency threshold of 0.1 was applied, and 13 experts were retained for the BWM weight calculation; the questionnaire structure and computational procedures are detailed in the following section. To assess the performance of the nine community park cases, an online auditing approach was employed. The research team conducted on-site photography at 50-meter intervals, capturing images from the front, back, left, and right directions at each point, and compiled all photographs into an online package for expert review. Based on criteria descriptions and professional judgment, experts provided quantitative ratings (1–10) for eight criteria and the overall park perception. This remote audit approach has been widely adopted in previous studies and is considered a reasonable and robust evaluation method (85, 86).

3.2 BWM

The detailed questionnaire design and calculation procedure of the BWM are shown below (see Figure 2):

Figure 2

Figure 2. The procedure of BWM.

Step 1: Attribute selection. Based on a literature review, the attributes to be analyzed were identified, including access points, pathways, facilities for different activities, open space, public amenities, natural features, sunlight, and incivilities.

Step 2: Experts determined the best and worst attributes.

Step 3: Each expert was asked to use a 1–9 scale to evaluate (a) the relative importance of the ‘best attribute' compared with all other attributes (Best-to-Others a_Bj), and (b) the relative importance of each attribute compared with the ‘worst attribute' (Others-to-Worst a_jW). Experts then provided preference scores for all attributes (including the worst attribute).

Step 4: The optimal weights of all attributes ($w_1^{*},w_2^{*}$, …, $w_n^{*}$) were subsequently calculated. The objective was to minimize the maximum absolute deviation across all attributes j. This yields the following min–max optimization model:

$\begin{array}{ll}\text{min max }\left\{|w_B-a_{Bj}{w}_j|,|w_j-a_{jW}{w}_W|\right\}& (1)\end{array}$

$\begin{array}{ll}\text{s}.\text{t}.{\displaystyle \sum _j}{w}_j=1,w_j\ge 0,\text{ for all }j& (2)\end{array}$

To improve computational efficiency and stability, the nonlinear model was transformed into a linear programming form min ξ^L s.t (62):

$\begin{array}{ll}|w_B-a_{B_j}{w}_j|\le {\xi }^L,forallj& (3)\end{array}$

$\begin{array}{ll}|w_j-a_{jW}{w}_W|\le {\xi }^L,forallj& (4)\end{array}$

$\begin{array}{ll}{\displaystyle \sum _j}{w}_j=1,w_j\ge 0,forallj& (5)\end{array}$

Solving the model produces the optimal weight vector ($w_1^{*},w_2^{*}$, …, $w_n^{*}$) along with the consistency values ξ^L. A consistency value ξ^L closer to 0 indicates higher internal consistency in expert evaluations (63). Among the 23 expert evaluations, 10 experts produced consistency values ξ >0.1, and their judgments were excluded for insufficient consistency. The weights of the eight attributes were calculated for each of the remaining 13 experts, and the average values were taken as the final distribution of criteria weights, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3

Table 3. The results of BWM.

3.3 Modified-VIKOR

This study applied a 10-point scale to evaluate nine community parks in Xiangzhou District, Zhuhai (A1,A₂,…,A9). The evaluation criteria included eight dimensions: access points, pathways, facilities for different activities, open space, public amenities, natural features, sunlight, and incivilities (n = 8). For Park A_k under criterion j, the performance score is denoted as f_kj. The relative importance of criterion j in the BWM is denoted as w_j, where j=1,2,…, n.

Step 1: Using a 10-point scale, decision-makers set the aspired value $f_j^{aspired}$ as 10 and the worst value $f_j^{worst}$ as 1. Raw performance scores were then transformed into normalized gap scores r_kj, reflecting the degree of deviation of each park from the ideal state. The normalization formula is:

$\begin{array}{ll}{r}_{kj}=(|f_j^{\text{aspired}}-f_{kj}|)/(|f_j^{\text{aspired}}-f_j^{\text{worst}}|)=(|10-f_{kj}|)/(10-1)& (6)\end{array}$

This modification, which defines the questionnaire scale directly as the decision space rather than using the performance of criteria as the decision space, enables the modified VIKOR to evaluate alternatives against a theoretical ideal instead of a relative best within the sample (see Figure 3). This adjustment avoids the drawback of ‘selecting the best among poor options', making the method more suitable for improvement-oriented contexts (48).

Figure 3

Figure 3. The main difference between traditional VIKOR and Modified VIKOR.

Step 2: Calculation of BWM-weighted group utility and maximum regret. For each alternative A_k, the BWM-weighted average group utility S_k and maximum regret R_k were computed as:

$\begin{array}{ll}{S}_k={\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^n}{w}_j{r}_{kj}& (7)\end{array}$

$\begin{array}{ll}{R}_k={max}_j\left\{r_{kj}\mid j=1,2,\dots ,n\right\}& (8)\end{array}$

These values reflect both overall performance and the weakest dimension of each park.

Step 3: Balancing group utility and individual regret. To integrate ‘overall performance' and ‘risk avoidance', a parameter δ (0 ≤ δ ≤ 1) was introduced to define their relative importance of S_k and R_k. Following previous studies, δ was set at 0.5 to balance mean utility and maximum regret (64). In the modified VIKOR, the aspired value of both average group utility S^aspired and maximum regret R^aspired are defined as 0, while their worst levels S^worst and R^wost are defined as 1. The synthesized index V_k was then calculated as:

$\begin{array}{l}{V}_k=\delta (S_k-S^{\text{aspired }})/(S^{\text{worst }}-S^{\text{aspired }})\\ +(1-\delta )(R_k-R^{\text{aspired }})/(R^{\text{wost }}-R^{\text{aspired }})\\ =\delta S_k+(1-\delta )R_k& (9)\end{array}$

Step 4: Determination of improvement priorities. When decision-makers aim to improve the overall performance of park A_k, the standardized gap scores r_kj are multiplied by the BWM-derived weights w_j. This produces the weighted gap value for park A_k under criterion j, denoted as g_kj:

$\begin{array}{ll}{g}_{kj}=w_j·r_{kj}& (10)\end{array}$

Step 5: Ranking of alternatives. Based on the comprehensive index V_k from Step 3, the nine community parks were ranked from best to worst, as shown in Table 4. Combined with the improvement priorities g_kj in Step 4, this evaluation provides quantitative and actionable guidance for enhancing community parks in Xiangzhou District with respect to mitigating depression among older adults.

Table 4

Table 4. Modified VIKOR result.

4 Results and discussion

4.1 Theoretical implications

The NGST was originally developed to evaluate the overall environmental quality of community parks (63). However, empirical evidence has shown that many of the environmental dimensions it encompasses are also closely associated with the alleviation of depressive symptoms among older adults (8, 12, 33, 60, 67, 68, 70, 74–81, 87–90). Building on this foundation, the present study expanded and refined the NGST framework by incorporating a mental health-oriented perspective. Eight criteria were established, and their relative weights under the goal of ‘improving depression among older adults' were recalibrated using expert knowledge and the BWM, in order to reveal the shifts in criterion priorities across different evaluative perspectives.

The results indicate substantial differences between the new weighting structure and the original NGST. In the NGST, Incivilities had the highest weight (24.0%), whereas in the present study, its importance declined considerably (10.6%, ranking sixth among eight), suggesting a relatively limited importance about elderly mental health. Conversely, Recreation Facilities, which had the lowest weight in the NGST (16.26%), emerged as far more important in this study. The related criteria, Open Space and Facilities for Different Activities, ranked first (16.3%) and second (14.3%), respectively. This shift reflects a transition of focus from ‘environmental quality assessment' toward ‘psychological health intervention'. In addition, Amenities and Natural Features consistently maintained high importance in both frameworks (NGST: 22% and 20%; this study: 13.5% and 14.0%), demonstrating their sustained significance in park experience and emotional restoration. Meanwhile, Access held a relatively low weight in the NGST (18.0%, second to last), and its corresponding criteria, Access Points and Pathways, also ranked lowest in this study (10.37% and 10.04%), indicating similar prioritization in both perceptions of park quality and psychological restoration.

According to ART and SRT, Natural Features can directly promote psychological relaxation and emotional restoration through visual and sensory channels (19, 24, 91), while conditions such as Open Space, Activity Facilities, and Amenities indirectly mitigate depression by encouraging physical activity and social interaction (24, 71). In contrast, access points and Incivilities exert relatively limited effects on mental restoration, which explains their lower weights. Notably, the newly introduced criterion, Sunlight, obtained a moderate weight (11.0%, ranked fifth), consistent with recent empirical findings showing that adequate sunlight exposure enhances environmental perception and social interaction among older adults, thereby contributing positively to emotional recovery (71, 81).

Overall, this study systematically revised the traditional NGST framework within the context of improving depression among older adults, developing a more mental health–oriented and context-sensitive weighting system. The proposed framework provides new insights for the evaluation and design of age-friendly community parks.

Beyond criteria weights, this study further examined the characteristics of several alternative ranking methods that are frequently compared with the modified VIKOR method, including Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), the classical VIKOR, Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation II (PROMETHEE II), and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) (92, 93)(as shown in Table 5). Experts' direct judgments of overall performance were incorporated, and Spearman correlation analysis was employed to identify both the commonalities and differences among these approaches (as shown in Table 6).

Table 5

Table 5. The comparison of different ranking methods.

Table 6

Table 6. The results of Spearman correlation analysis.

Spearman correlation results showed that SAW, PROMETHEE II, TOPSIS, and modified VIKOR were more consistent with expert rankings (=0.8), while traditional VIKOR exhibited lower consistency. This indicates that most ranking approaches can replicate expert intuition to some extent. From a decision-making philosophy perspective, different methods embody distinct logics.

From a decision-philosophical perspective, different MCDM methods embody distinct logical mechanisms. The SAW method is based on a simple and intuitive weighted summation, directly aggregating the performance scores of each criterion. In contrast, TOPSIS determines the relative closeness of each alternative by calculating its Euclidean distance to the positive and negative ideal solutions. Previous studies have reported a high degree of similarity between SAW and TOPSIS results (94), and this study reconfirms that finding, with a correlation coefficient as high as 0.983. Traditional VIKOR ranks alternatives solely according to their proximity to the ideal solution and introduces a compromise mechanism between individual criteria and overall performance, which is considered to facilitate convergence toward the ideal solution (93). However, this study found that traditional VIKOR yielded the lowest mean correlation coefficient with other methods (0.856), suggesting that its ranking logic differs substantially from the others. PROMETHEE II determines rankings through pairwise outranking relationships among alternatives, thereby providing a more comprehensive reflection of their relative advantages and disadvantages. Nevertheless, its computational complexity increases under multi-alternative conditions (95). Despite this, the results of this study show that PROMETHEE II achieved the highest agreement with expert judgments, indicating its strong capability in capturing human decision preferences.

Compared with these methods, the Modified VIKOR exhibits a distinctly different decision-making perspective. It extends the ‘realistic feasible ideal level' adopted by TOPSIS and traditional VIKOR into a ‘theoretical aspiration level', making it more suitable for improvement-oriented analyses (48). In addition, the method introduces a mechanism for calculating the priority of criterion-level improvements across alternatives, further enhancing its ability to identify critical weaknesses and formulate targeted improvement strategies (59). Notably, this study found that the ranking results of the Modified VIKOR and TOPSIS were completely identical, with a correlation coefficient of 1.000.

Opricovic and Tzeng (93) pointed out that although VIKOR and TOPSIS differ fundamentally in their aggregation logic, their ranking results diverge significantly only within certain regions of the decision space. Shekhovtsov and Salabun (96) further demonstrated that when the number of alternatives is small, the ranking discrepancies between the two methods tend to diminish. These findings help explain the results of this study: given the limited number of cases and the relatively homogeneous distribution of criterion performances, the distinction between the two methods was not fully manifested, leading to identical ranking outcomes. Collectively, these results deepen the understanding of the methodological positioning and contextual applicability of the modified VIKOR approach.

4.2 Practical implications

The results of this study provide specific and systematic design guidelines for improving depressive symptoms among older adults in nine community parks in Xiangzhou District, Zhuhai. The modified VIKOR evaluation revealed that Facilities for Different Activities and Open Space exhibited the largest performance gaps, representing the most urgent shortcomings to be addressed. This suggests that older adults currently lack sufficient spaces for exercise and social interaction, which hinders the maintenance of positive emotions and psychological wellbeing. To address this issue, it is recommended to prioritize the addition of moderately distributed activity nodes (e.g., fitness equipment, chess tables, and shaded rest areas) within the existing spatial structure, while enhancing spatial openness and accessibility to encourage physical activity and social engagement.

Secondly, the overall performance of the Amenities criterion was relatively weak (0.055–0.076), indicating insufficient provision of basic facilities such as seating, trash bins, and lighting. This shortage can lead to user inconvenience and environmental disorder. These low-cost yet high-efficiency amenities should therefore be prioritized to improve daily accessibility and comfort. For example, installing continuous seating systems along pathway junctions or landscape nodes, enriching layered nighttime lighting, and maintaining appropriate distances between trash bins and rest areas can significantly enhance user experience.

In addition, several community parks (e.g., Cases 1, 8, and 9) showed considerable variation in Natural Features and Incivilities, suggesting a need to optimize vegetation hierarchy, increase shade and floral diversity, and reduce negative stimuli such as litter and noise. Although these improvements are not the most urgent, they can exert sustained positive effects on emotional stability and the mitigation of depression among older adults.

By contrast, the score differences for Access Points, Pathways, and Sunlight conditions were relatively small (approximately 0.03–0.05), indicating that basic accessibility and lighting environments are generally adequate. Subsequent efforts should focus on fine-tuning barrier-free design, paving continuity, and localized light adjustments.

Overall, the practical intervention strategy should follow a progressive logic: first addressing the major deficiencies, then optimizing user experience, and finally refining environmental quality. Priority should be given to improving activity spaces, open areas, and public amenities; subsequently, efforts should focus on enhancing natural elements and environmental order; and finally, detailed adjustments to access points, pathways, and sunlight conditions should be implemented. Such a stepwise approach can maximize the support for elderly mental health and community vitality under limited resource conditions.

5 Conclusion

With the accelerating pace of population aging, community parks are playing an increasingly vital role in promoting the mental health of older adults. However, most existing park evaluation systems remain environmentally oriented and lack systematic investigation into their effectiveness in alleviating depressive symptoms among the elderly. To address this gap, this study refined the NGST framework by incorporating a mental health-oriented perspective, thereby establishing an evaluation system focused on improving depression among older adults. Eight criteria were reweighted using expert knowledge and the BWM, and the Modified VIKOR technique was employed to conduct an empirical evaluation of nine community parks in Xiangzhou District, Zhuhai, forming a more actionable and improvement-oriented assessment framework.

The results revealed that Open space, Facilities for Different Activities, and Natural Features hold the highest priority in mitigating depression, whereas Access Points, Pathways and Incivilities received relatively lower weights, showing a distinct divergence from the original NGST weighting structure. In addition, the application of the modified VIKOR method demonstrated strong potential for diagnosing key deficiencies and formulating targeted improvement strategies, while also exhibiting high consistency with the TOPSIS approach.

Theoretically, this study extends the applicability of traditional community park evaluation frameworks by integrating mental health goals into the assessment of park quality, enriching the interdisciplinary discourse between geriatric medicine and urban design. Methodologically, by introducing BWM and Modified VIKOR, this study broadens the methodological perspective of environmental evaluation and contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the positioning and comparative strengths of multi-criteria decision-making models.

Practically, the findings provide a systematic priority roadmap for the renewal and optimization of community parks. Priority should be given to improving activity and open spaces as well as public amenities, followed by the enhancement of natural features and environmental order, and finally, the fine-tuning of access, pathways, and sunlight conditions. This stepwise strategy can help maximize mental health benefits and community vitality under limited resource conditions, offering feasible decision support for the creation of age-friendly urban public spaces.

Despite its contributions, this study has several limitations. First, it did not directly collect individual-level data from older adults with depression but instead adopted an exploratory expert-based approach to construct the evaluation framework, without conducting experimental analysis or causal inference. Future research should validate these findings through confirmatory empirical studies. Second, the evaluation framework was built on expert judgment rather than purely objective auditing, which imposes higher requirements on evaluators' professional expertise. Future work could develop hybrid frameworks that integrate objective measurements with expert knowledge to enhance generalizability and operational applicability. Additionally, all experts involved were from mainland China and Macao, whose professional experiences may limit the transferability of the derived weights to other cultural and social contexts. Comparative studies across regions and populations are recommended to improve external validity. Finally, this study evaluated only nine community park cases, which may not provide sufficient robustness for methodological comparisons. Future research should increase the sample size to enable a more systematic analysis of differences and applicability across MCDM approaches.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

Ethical approval was not required for the studies involving humans because this study did not involve any procedures requiring formal ethical approval. All data were obtained through expert subjective evaluations of environmental attributes. No psychological or physiological data were collected, and no vulnerable populations or sensitive personal information were involved. All participating experts provided written informed consent prior to data collection. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

Z-HZ: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft. Y-FZ: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. C-CL: Funding acquisition, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all participants who took part in the included studies.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The handling editor LX declared a past collaboration with the author Y-FZ and Z-HZ.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

1. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Affairs D of E and S. World Population Ageing 2023: Challenges and Opportunities of Population Ageing in the Least Developed Countries. Bloomfield: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. (2024).

Google Scholar

2. Medici AC. Health Sector Challenges and Policies in the Context of Ageing Populations. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (2021).

Google Scholar

3. Ahamad V, Das U. health on the move: cardiovascular disease risk among ageing male migrants in India. Arch Gerontol Geriatr Plus (2025) 15:100196. doi: 10.1016/j.aggp.2025.100196

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Kim JH, Thiruvengadam R. Hypertension in an ageing population: diagnosis, mechanisms, collateral health risks, treatments, and clinical challenges. Ageing Res Rev. (2024) 98:102344. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2024.102344

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

5. You R, Li W, Ni L, Peng B. Study on the trajectory of depression among middle-aged and elderly disabled people in China: Based on group-based trajectory model. SSM-Population Health. (2023) 24:101510. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2023.101510

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Afrashteh MY, Majzoobi MR, Janjani P, Forstmeier S. The relationship between the meaning of life, psychological wellbeing, self-care, and social capital, with depression and death anxiety in the elderly living in nursing homes: the mediating role of loneliness. Heliyon. (2024) 10:e06155. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30124

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

7. Xie L-Q, Zhang J-P, Peng F, Jiao N-N. Prevalence and related influencing factors of depressive symptoms for empty-nest elderly living in the rural area of YongZhou, China. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. (2010) 50:24–9. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2009.01.003

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Xu W, Zhaoming W, Wu Z, Li B, Lei Y. Mental health effects of urban landscape and environmental stress on the elderly, an empirical community-scale study. Urban Forest Urban Green. (2025) 97:129009. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2025.129009

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Hu T, Zhao X, Wu M, Li Z, Luo L, Yang C, et al. Prevalence of depression in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. (2022) 311:114511. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2022.114511

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Yang P, Tian L, Xia Y, Hu M, Xiao X, Leng Y, et al. Association of sleep quality and its change with the risk of depression in middle-aged and elderly people: a 10-year cohort study from England. J Affect Disord. (2025) 373:245–52. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.12.079

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Salman A, Lee Y-H. Spiritual practices and effects of spiritual wellbeing and depression on elders' self-perceived health. Appl Nurs Res. (2019) 48:68–74. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2019.05.018

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

12. Wang X, Fu J, Wang X. Self-neglect, anxiety and depression among empty nesters in China: a network analysis. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. (2025) 89:151893. doi: 10.1016/j.apnu.2025.151893

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

13. Wang R, Su H, Xu T, Jiang W, Liu H, Wang W, et al. The association between urbanization and depression in the elderly: a network analysis from the complexity science perspective. J Affect Disord. (2024) 356:72–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.04.026

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Rydin Y, Bleahu A, Davies M, Dávila JD, Friel S, De Grandis G, et al. Shaping cities for health: complexity and the planning of urban environments in the 21st century. Lancet. (2012) 379:2079–108. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60435-8

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

15. Yue Y, Yang D, Owen N, Van Dyck D. The built environment and mental health among older adults in Dalian: the mediating role of perceived environmental attributes. Soc Sci Med. (2022) 311:115333. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115333

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

16. Bustamante G, Guzman V, Kobayashi LC, Finlay J. Mental health and wellbeing in times of COVID-19: A mixed-methods study of the role of neighborhood parks, outdoor spaces, and nature among US older adults. Health Place. (2022) 76:102813. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2022.102813

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Coventry PA. Brown JenniferVE, Pervin J, Brabyn S, Pateman R, Breedvelt J, Gilbody S, Stancliffe R, McEachan R, White Piran CL. Nature-based outdoor activities for mental and physical health: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SSM - Population Health. (2021) 16:100934. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100934

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Kabisch N, Püffel C, Masztalerz O, Hemmerling J, Kraemer R. Physiological and psychological effects of visits to different urban green and street environments in older people: a field experiment in a dense inner-city area. Landsc Urban Plan. (2021) 207:103998. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103998

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

19. Qiu L, Chen Q, Gao T. The effects of urban natural environments on preference and self-reported psychological restoration of the elderly. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2021) 18:509. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18020509

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Barton J, Pretty J. What is the best dose of nature and green exercise for improving mental health? A multi-study analysis. Environ Sci Technol. (2010) 44:3947–55. doi: 10.1021/es903183r

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

21. Sokale IO, Conway SH, Douphrate DI. Built environment and its association with depression among older adults: a systematic review. Open Public Health J. (2022) 15:e2202030. doi: 10.2174/18749445-v15-e2202030

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Yao W, Zhang X, Gong Q. The effect of exposure to the natural environment on stress reduction: a meta-analysis. Urban Forest Urban Green. (2021) 57:126932. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126932

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Weeland J, Moens MA, Beute F, Assink M, Staaks JPC, Overbeek G, et al. dose of nature: Two three-level meta-analyses of the beneficial effects of exposure to nature on children's self-regulation. J Environ Psychol. (2019) 65:101326. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.101326

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Zhang Y, Wu L, Zhao W, Zheng L, Zuo L. Nature's shield-harnessing green spaces to combat dementia: a global meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. (2025) 158:106360. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2025.106360

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

25. Zhang Z, Zhang J. Perceived residential environment of neighborhood and subjective wellbeing among the elderly in China: a mediating role of sense of community. J Environ Psychol. (2017) 51:82–94. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.03.004

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

26. Tabrizi N, Lak A, Moussavi. A SMR. Green space and the health of the older adult during pandemics: a narrative review on the experience of COVID-19. Front Public Health (2023) 11:1218091. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1218091

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

27. Seo J, Kim J. Exploring the moderating effect of private green space on the relationship between density and housing prices. Habitat Int. (2024) 154:103231. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2024.103231

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

28. Zhao Y, van den Berg PE, Ossokina IV, Arentze TA. How do urban parks, neighborhood open spaces, and private gardens relate to individuals' subjective wellbeing: results of a structural equation model. Sustain Cities Soc. (2024) 101:105094. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2023.105094

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Xiao Y, Li Z, Webster C. Estimating the mediating effect of privately-supplied green space on the relationship between urban public green space and property value: Evidence from Shanghai, China. Land Use Policy. (2016) 54:439–47. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.03.001

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

30. Zhao J, Aziz FA, Ujang N. Factors influencing the usage, restrictions, accessibility, and preference of urban neighborhood parks—a review of the empirical evidence. Urban Forest Urban Green. (2024) 100:128473. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2024.128473

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Poortinga W, Bird N, Hallingberg B, Phillips R, Williams D. The role of perceived public and private green space in subjective health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak. Landsc Urban Plan. (2021) 211:104092. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104092

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

32. Kazmierczak A. The contribution of local parks to neighbourhood social ties. Landsc Urban Plan. (2013) 109:31–44. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.05.007

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

33. Chen L, Yan R, Hu Y. City walk or nature walk? Evidence-based psychological and physiological outcomes—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Urban Forest Urban Green. (2025) 97:128726. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2025.128726

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

34. Gao T, Bernstein P. Physical appearance design evaluation of community emotional healing installations based on analytic hierarchy process–fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. Buildings. (2025) 15:773. doi: 10.3390/buildings15050773

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

35. Nasrabadi MT, Morassafar S, Pourzakarya M, Dunning R. Investigating the impacts of green spaces planning on social sustainability improvement in Tehran, Iran: a SWOT-AHP analysis. Local Environ. (2023) 28:393–410. doi: 10.1080/13549839.2023.2169914

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

36. Srdjevic B, Srdjevic Z, Reynolds KM, Lakicevic M, Zdero S. Using analytic hierarchy process and best—worst method in group evaluation of urban park quality. Forests. (2022) 13:290. doi: 10.3390/f13020290

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Xiang L, Tian Y, Pan Y. Study on landscape evaluation and optimization strategy of Central Park in Qingkou Town. Sci Rep. (2022) 12:1978. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-06006-z

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

38. Yuan W, Yang M, Liu D, Fu X, Yu L, Wang K. Evaluation of the applicability of hospital-affiliated green spaces to patient recovery using the entropy weight method and grey relational analysis. Front Public Health (2024) 12:1362884. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1362884

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

39. Deng Y, Paul DR. The relationships between depressive symptoms, functional health status, physical activity, and the availability of recreational facilities: a rural-urban comparison in middle-aged and older chinese adults. IntJ Behav Med. (2018) 25:322–30. doi: 10.1007/s12529-018-9714-3

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

40. Di N, Li S, Xiang H, Xie Y, Mao Z, Hou J, et al. Associations of residential greenness with depression and anxiety in rural Chinese adults. Innovation (2020) 1:100054. doi: 10.1016/j.xinn.2020.100054

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

41. Junlin R, Han L. Does urban green space improve household wellbeing? Evidence From Chinese cities. Child Family Soc Work. (2025) 30:e70019. doi: 10.1111/cfs.70019

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

42. Wang T-C, Tang T-W, Ma S-M, Lin T-K, Tsai C-L. Effects of the green view index on anxiety reduction and perceived exertion during cycling in older adults. Exp Gerontol. (2025) 208:112820. doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2025.112820

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

43. Chu Y-T, Li D, Chang P-J. Effects of urban park quality, environmental perception, and leisure activity on wellbeing among the older population. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2021) 18:11402. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182111402

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

44. Gascon M, Triguero-Mas M, Martínez D, Dadvand P, Forns J, Plasència A, et al. Mental health benefits of long-term exposure to residential green and blue spaces: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2015) 12:4354–79. doi: 10.3390/ijerph120404354

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

45. Ríos-Rodríguez ML, Rosales C, Lorenzo M, Muinos G, Hernández B. Influence of perceived environmental quality on the perceived restorativeness of public spaces. Front Psychol. (2021) 12:644763. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.644763

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

46. Jiang F, Ma L, Broyd T, Chen K, Luo H, Pei Y. Sustainable road alignment planning in the built environment based on the MCDM-GIS method. Sustain Cities Soc. (2022) 87:104246. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.104246

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

47. Gupta H. Assessing organizations performance on the basis of GHRM practices using BWM and Fuzzy TOPSIS. J Environ Manage. (2018) 226:201–16. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.005

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

48. Tzeng G-H, Shen K-Y. New Concepts and Trends of Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision Making, 1st Edn. New York, NY : CRC Press (2017).

Google Scholar

49. Bird ME, Datta GD, Van Hulst A, Kestens Y, Barnett TA, A. reliability assessment of a direct-observation park evaluation tool: the Parks, activity and recreation among kids (PARK) tool. BMC Public Health. (2015) 15:906. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2209-0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

50. Edwards N, Hooper P, Trapp GSA, Bull F, Boruff B, Giles-Corti B. Development of a Public Open Space Desktop Auditing Tool (POSDAT): a remote sensing approach. Appl Geograp. (2013) 38:22–30. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.11.010

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

51. Joseph RP, Maddock JE. Comparative analysis of five observational audit tools to assess the physical environment of parks for physical activity, 2016. Prev Chronic Dis. (2016) 13:E166. doi: 10.5888/pcd13.160176

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

52. Kaczynski AT, Wilhelm Stanis SA, Besenyi GM. Development and testing of a community stakeholder park audit tool. Am J Prev Med. (2012) 42:242–9. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.10.018

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

53. Taylor BT, Fernando P, Bauman AE, Williamson A, Craig JC, Redman S. Measuring the quality of public open space using Google Earth. Am J Prev Med. (2011) 40:105–12. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.10.024

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

54. Gidlow C, van Kempen E, Smith G, Triguero-Mas M, Kruize H, GraŽulevičiene R, et al. Development of the natural environment scoring tool (NEST). Urban Forest Urban Green. (2018) 29:322–33. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.12.007

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

55. Knobel P, Dadvand P, Alonso L, Costa L, Español M, Maneja R. Development of the urban green space quality assessment tool (RECITAL). Urban Forest Urban Green. (2021) 57:126895. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126895

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

56. Rigolon A, Németh J, A. QUality INdex of Parks for Youth (QUINPY): Evaluating urban parks through geographic information systems. Environ Plann B Urban Anal City Sci. (2018) 45:275–94. doi: 10.1177/0265813516672212

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

57. Cheng Q. Research on improving urban park green space landscape quality based on public psychological perception: a comprehensive AHP-TOPSIS-POE evaluation of typical parks in Jinan City. Front Psychol. (2025) 16:1418477. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1418477

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

58. Deng Z, Du Q, Lei B, Bi W. Evaluating perceived resilience of urban parks through perception–behavior feedback mechanisms: a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach. Buildings. (2025) 15:2488. doi: 10.3390/buildings15142488

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

59. Zhu B-W, Zhang J-R, Tzeng G-H, Huang S-L, Xiong L. Public open space development for elderly people by using the DANP-V model to establish continuous improvement strategies towards a sustainable and healthy aging society. Sustainability. (2017) 9:420. doi: 10.3390/su9030420

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

60. Li X, Zhu B-W, Xiong L, Li X-Y, Tzeng G-H. Exploring combinations of landscape features in urban green spaces and their recovery effects on minor depression. J Urban Plann Dev. (2025) 151:04024064. doi: 10.1061/JUPDDM.UPENG-5098

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

61. Rezaei J. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega. (2015) 53:49–57. doi: 10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

62. Wang K, Li X-Y, Zhu B-W, Xiong L, Tzeng G-H, A. data mining approach to explore the causal rules between environmental conditions of neighborhood parks and seniors' satisfaction. Cities. (2025) 162:105897. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2025.105897

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

63. Gidlow CJ, Ellis NJ, Bostock S. Development of the neighbourhood green space tool (NGST). Landsc Urban Plan. (2012) 106:347–58. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.04.007

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

64. Fossa AJ, D'Souza J, Bergmans RS, Zivin K. Adar SD. Different types of greenspace within urban parks and depressive symptoms among older US adults living in urban areas Environment International. (2024) 192:109016. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2024.109016

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

65. Chang Y, Park K-Y, Hwang H-S, Park H-K. Association between type and intensity of physical activity and depression. Korean J Fam Med. (2022) 43:254–60. doi: 10.4082/kjfm.21.0146

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

66. Mukherjee D, Safraj S, Tayyab M, Shivashankar R, Patel SA, Narayanan G, et al. Park availability and major depression in individuals with chronic conditions: Is there an association in urban India? Health Place. (2017) 47:54–62. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2017.07.004

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

67. Cui Q, Tan L, Ma H, Wei X, Yi S, Zhao D, et al. Effective or useless? Assessing the impact of park entrance addition policy on green space services from the 15-min city perspective. J Clean Prod. (2024) 467:142951. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142951

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

68. Geary RS, Thompson D, Mizen A, Akbari A, Garrett JK, Rowney FM, et al. Ambient greenness, access to local green spaces, and subsequent mental health: a 10-year longitudinal dynamic panel study of 2–3 million adults in Wales. Lancet Planet Health. (2023) 7:e809–18. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(23)00212-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

69. Sundling C, Jakobsson M. How do urban walking environments impact pedestrians' experience and psychological health? A systematic review. Sustainability. (2023) 15:10817. doi: 10.3390/su151410817

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

70. Ma J, Lin P, Williams J. Effectiveness of nature-based walking interventions in improving mental health in adults: a systematic review. Curr Psychol. (2024) 43:9521–39. doi: 10.1007/s12144-023-05112-z

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

71. Wang H, Qu Y, Chen Y. How natural and artificial park features influence older adults' visiting behaviors and mental health: evidence from a psychological survey in China. City Environ Interact. (2025) 18:100238. doi: 10.1016/j.cacint.2025.100238

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

72. Felappi JF, Sommer JH, Falkenberg T, Terlau W, Kötter T. Urban park qualities driving visitors mental wellbeing and wildlife conservation in a Neotropical megacity. Sci Rep. (2024) 14:4856. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-55357-2

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

73. Olszewska-Guizzo A, Sia A, Fogel A, Ho R. Features of urban green spaces associated with positive emotions, mindfulness and relaxation. Sci Rep. (2022) 12:20695. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-24637-0

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

74. Mu Y, Yi M, Liu Q. Association of neighborhood recreational facilities and depressive symptoms among Chinese older adults. BMC Geriatr. (2023) 23:667. doi: 10.1186/s12877-023-04369-0

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

75. He Y, Lahti-Pulkkinen M, Metsälä J, Halonen JI, Miettunen J, Kerckhoffs J, et al. Residential exposure to traffic noise and incidence of depression and anxiety from childhood through adulthood: a Finnish register study. Environ. Res. (2025) 245:122443. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2025.122443

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

76. Robinette JW, Campos B. Depression risk and resilience in a diverse sample of older adults in the United States. Soc Sci Med. (2024) 361:117382. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117382

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

77. Jin M, Chen Z, Pei N, Li J, Ren Z. Nonlinear effect of urban noise pollution on depression of the elderly in China based on the Bayesian machine learning method. Applied Acoustics. (2024) 225:110207. doi: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2024.110207

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

78. Burt CJ, Kondo MC, Hohl BC, Gong CH, Bushman G, Wixom C, et al. Community greening, fear of crime, and mental health outcomes. Am J Comm Psychol. (2022) 69:46–58. doi: 10.1002/ajcp.12544

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

79. South EC, Hohl BC, Kondo MC, MacDonald JM, Branas CC. Effect of greening vacant land on mental health of community-dwelling adults: a cluster randomized trial. JAMA Netw Open. (2018) 1:e180298–e180298. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.0298

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

80. Dunphy K, Baker FA, Dumaresq E, Carroll-Haskins K, Eickholt J, Ercole M, et al. Creative arts interventions to address depression in older adults: a systematic review of outcomes, processes, and mechanisms. Front Psychol. (2019) 9:2655. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02655

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

81. Brown MJ, Jacobs DE. Residential light and risk for depression and falls: results from the LARES study of eight European Cities. Public Health Rep. (2011) 126:131–40. doi: 10.1177/00333549111260S117

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

82. Lam WWY, Loo BPY, Mahendran R. Neighbourhood environment and depressive symptoms among the elderly in Hong Kong and Singapore. Int J Health Geogr. (2020) 19:48. doi: 10.1186/s12942-020-00238-w

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

83. Xiangzhou District Government. Announcement of the Seventh National Population Census in Xiangzhou District, Zhuhai City. Available online at: https://www.zhxz.gov.cn/gkmlpt/content/2/2875/post_2875242.html#994 (Accessed September 25, 2025).

Google Scholar

84. Zhuhai Municipal Civil Affairs Bureau. Aging Work Department: How will elderly care service facilities be built and improved? Understanding Zhuhai's Special Plan in One Text. Available online at: https://www.zhuhai.gov.cn/smzj/gkmlpt/content/3/3803/post_3803554.html#6799 (Accessed September 25, 2025).

Google Scholar

85. Rundle AG, Bader MD, Richards CA, Neckerman KM, Teitler JO. Using Google Street View to audit neighborhood environments. Am J Prev Med. (2011) 40:94–100. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.09.034

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

86. He P, Yu B, Ma J, Luo K, Chen S, Shen Z. Exploring the non-linear relationship and synergistic effect between urban built environment and public sentiment integrating macro-and micro-level perspective: a case study in San Francisco. Front Psychol. (2024) 15:1276923. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1276923

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

87. Nordh H, Hartig T, Hagerhall CM, Fry G. Components of small urban parks that predict the possibility for restoration. Urban Forest Urban Green. (2009) 8:225–35. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.06.003

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

88. Cohen M, Burrowes K, Gwam P. The Health Benefits of Parks and their Economic Impacts. Washington, DC: Urban Institute (2022). Available online at: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2022-03/the-health-benefits-of-parks-and-their-economic-impacts_0.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com (Accessed September 25, 2025).

Google Scholar

89. Bratman GN, Anderson CB, Berman MG, Cochran B, De Vries S, Flanders J, et al. Nature and mental health: an ecosystem service perspective. Sci Adv. (2019) 5:eaax0903. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aax0903

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

90. Sturm R, Cohen D. Proximity to urban parks and mental health. J Ment Health Policy Econ. (2014) 17:19.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

91. Rajoo KS, Karam DS, Abdu A, Rosli Z, Gerusu GJ. Addressing psychosocial issues caused by the COVID-19 lockdown: can urban greeneries help? Urban Forest Urban Green. (2021) 65:127340. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127340

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

92. Corrente S, Figueira JR, Greco S. The smaa-promethee method. Eur J Oper Res. (2014) 239:514–22. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.05.026

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

93. Opricovic S, Tzeng G-H. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res. (2004) 156:445–55. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

94. Ciardiello F, Genovese A. A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods. Ann Oper Res. (2023) 325:967–94. doi: 10.1007/s10479-023-05339-w

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

95. Behzadian M, Kazemzadeh RB, Albadvi A, Aghdasi M, PROMETHEE. A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur J Oper Res. (2010) 200:198–215. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.021

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

96. A comparative case study of the VIKOR and TOPSIS rankings similarity. Procedia Comput Sci. (2020) 176:3730–40. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2020.09.014

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar