CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-08-04). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 1 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 2217 · Search date 2026-08-04 · Methodology v0.6

Residential greenness,
does it really help with Lower hazard of nonaccidental all-cause mortality?

30-Second Summary
C
Evidence Grade C · 56 · Safety acceptable
Greener residential surroundings were associated with lower mortality, but personal nature exposure was not measured
Residential greenness itself showed no serious harm signal. Local allergens, heat, safety, and accessibility still vary by setting.
What the
research shows
The grade is C with 56 points. A US cohort followed 108,630 nurses from 2000 through 2008 and recorded 8,604 deaths. Women in the highest quintile of cumulative NDVI within 250 meters of home had 12% lower nonaccidental mortality hazard than the lowest quintile, HR 0.88 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.94). Satellite greenness, however, did not measure how much nature each person actually used.
What the
ads claim
This is an observational association with greener addresses. It does not guarantee that choosing a particular home, park, or tourism product will extend an individual's life.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • NDVI is calculated from red and near-infrared reflectance and does not directly measure time spent in nature.
  • The cohort recorded 8,604 nonaccidental deaths over 627,008 person-years among 108,630 women.
  • The highest-versus-lowest quintile HR for cumulative 250-meter NDVI was 0.88 (0.82-0.94).
Gap Measurement · Verdict 2217 · C 56
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

The Nurses' Health Study analyzed 108,630 women, 627,008 person-years, and 8,604 nonaccidental deaths. Exposure was cumulative satellite NDVI in 250-meter and 1,250-meter buffers linked to address histories. The fully adjusted model included age, race and ethnicity, smoking status and pack-years, each parent's occupation, registered-nurse degree, marital status, spouse's education, and census-tract median home value and median income. US region was examined through stratification and effect-modification checks, not entered as a main-model adjustment variable; urbanicity, moves, physical activity, PM2.5, social engagement, and mental health were also examined. An analysis excluding deaths in the first one or two years was not identified in the paper. Restricting movers gave similar results but could not remove health-related residential selection. NIH grants funded the work. The observational comparator was the lowest NDVI quintile, not no treatment, a waitlist, or an active control.

02

Why this is classified as C (56)

The positive association with objective deaths is credible, but personal-exposure misclassification and residual confounding in a single observational evidence stream give C with 56 points.

Counterpoint. An association between greenness and mortality is different from evidence that greening or moving extends life.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Cross-checked satellite NDVI definition, death counts, socioeconomic, urbanicity and air-pollution adjustment, and whether early deaths were excluded

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointHHard endpoint - actual events such as death
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI2Decisive evidence is publicly or non-profit funded
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (C).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Lower nonaccidental all-cause mortalityCThe highest-versus-lowest quintile HR was 0.88.
Greater personal exposure to nature?NDVI measured vegetation around home, not personal time in nature.
Longer life caused by greening or moving?This evidence did not randomize a greening or residential-move intervention.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 1Nationwide prospective cohort8,604NIH grants T32 HL098048, UM1 CA186107, and R01 ES017017Nonaccidental all-cause and cause-specific mortality from 2000 to 2008Highest versus lowest quintile of cumulative 250-meter NDVI: HR 0.88 (0.82-0.94).Pivotal large mortality-event evidence
§

Receipt — 1 References

All 1 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-04).

James P, Hart JE, Banay RF, Laden F. Exposure to Greenness and Mortality in a Nationwide Prospective Cohort Study of Women. Environ Health Perspect. 2016;124(9):1344-1352. PMID: 27074702. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1510363.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-08-04 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Residential greenness x lower all-cause mortality Evidence Grade C card
[Chamgap] Residential greenness x lower all-cause mortality — Evidence Grade C·56. 1 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/antioxidant-aging/residential-greenness-all-cause-mortality/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.