Wind turbines: Vacated/abandoned homes – Exploring research participants’ descriptions of adverse health effects and medical diagnoses provided by their physicians and physician specialists
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: The risk of harm associated with living within 10 km of industrial wind turbines (IWTs) is unresolved and continues to be debated internationally. While sources such as judicial proceedings, scientific literature, social media, and Internet websites report that some neighbors contemplate leaving their homes, research on this topic is limited. This study continues to explore why they contemplated such a housing decision. Methodology: The ethics-reviewed study used the qualitative Grounded Theory (GT) methodology and interviewed 67 consenting participants, 18 years or older, who had previously lived, or were currently living, within 10 km of IWTs. Audio files were transcribed to text and the data were coded and analyzed using NVivo Pro (v. 12.6) software. Objectives: The objective of this manuscript is to explore participants’ descriptions of their medical diagnoses provided by their physicians and physician specialists. Results: Data analysis revealed primary and subthemes associated with environmental interference and altered living conditions. Of the 67 participants, eight described their diagnoses of medical conditions as given by their physicians and physician specialists. Descriptions of conversations with participants’ health-care providers were also surveyed. Discussion: Medical diagnoses, descriptions of comments by health practitioners and the commonality of globally reported adverse health effects (AHEs), support the potential risk of locating IWTs near residential areas. It is recommended that members of the public, government authorities, policy makers, researchers, health practitioners, and social scientists with an interest in health policy and disease prevention acknowledge this risk and advocate for the immediate, effective, and timely resolution for affected neighbors. Conclusions: The GT methodology was used to develop a substantive theory regarding the housing decisions of participants living within 10 km of a Wind Power Plant. Results from the interviews indicate that these decisions were motivated by the potential for, or the experience of, AHEs which they attributed to living in proximity to these installations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».