MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2252009452 · doi:10.1080/0376835x.2015.1115739

Kenya's focus on urban vulnerability and resilience in the midst of urban transitions in Nairobi

2016· article· en· W2252009452 on OpenAlexaff
Linda Beyer, Jay Chaudhuri, Barbara Kagima

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment Southern Africa · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
FundersUNICEFUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsSlumVulnerability (computing)SanitationPsychological interventionPsychological resilienceFood securitySocioeconomicsGeographyHuman settlementPovertyDemographic economicsEconomic growthEnvironmental healthEconomicsPopulationMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Addressing urban vulnerability requires an understanding of the underlying determinants of resilience for individuals, households, communities and institutions – to withstand shocks, to adapt and to change. Analysing urban resilience utilises the results of five rounds of the Indicator Development for Surveillance of Urban Emergencies surveys conducted in three informal settlements of Nairobi. Results show a significant deterioration in food security and household hunger in marginalised urban populations, with other deprivations including insecurity, negative coping behaviour and inadequate access to water and sanitation. Within slum populations, there was a significant variation in income and expenditure (p < 0.05) with lowest income quintiles spending over 100% of their income on food. Significant gender disparities have been shown in lowest income quintiles, with female breadwinners earning 62% compared with male breadwinners (p < 0.05). Recommendations from this analysis include establishing thresholds for vulnerability and concrete dimensions for measuring resilience that can initiate and guide related interventions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment Southern AfricaSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207