Correction: Erdoğan et al. Spatially Linking User Experience and Environmental Conditions: An Evidence-Based Evaluation of a Hospital Healing Garden. Buildings 2026, 16, 2068

In the original publication [1], the Master’s thesis ‘Berk, Ş. Investigation of User and Design Relations in the Sample of Hospital Garden. Master’s Thesis, Akdeniz University, Antalya, Türkiye, 2020’ was not cited.

The citation has now been inserted in Section 2 (Materials and Methods), Section 2.3.2 (Observation Form), Paragraphs 1 and 2 and should read: “A structured observation form was developed based on established frameworks for evaluating healing landscapes [9,16] (see Appendix A) [17]. The form assessed five core dimensions: planting quality, spatial accessibility, spatial organization, physical infrastructure, and visual aesthetics [17].”

The citation has also been inserted in Section 2 (Materials and Methods), Section 2.4 (Data Analysis), Paragraph 2 and should read: “To evaluate overall spatial quality, weighted total scores were computed based on observation ratings across the five assessment domains [17].”

There was an error in the original publication regarding the absence of the Acknowledgments section to recognize the foundation of the research dataset. A correction has been made to the backmatter, right before the References section, by adding the following Acknowledgments statement:

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the Master’s thesis ‘Investigation of user and design relations in the sample of hospital garden’ (by Şeyma Berk, supervised by Reyhan Erdoğan) for providing the foundational field data and structural observations that supported this research.

With this correction, the Master’s thesis has been added as Reference [17]. Consequently, both the in-text citations and the numerical order in the reference list for all subsequent sources have been adjusted and shifted upward by one position (the original Reference [17] becomes Reference [18], the original Reference [18] becomes Reference [19], and so on, continuing sequentially through to the end of the manuscript).

The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.