A Multicomponent Intervention to Encourage Stair Use in Municipal Buildings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Evaluate the incremental impact of environmental stairwell enhancements on stair usage in addition to prompts. DESIGN: Phased, nonrandomized, quasi-experimental intervention. SETTING: Two 6-story and one 8-story municipal government office buildings-each with 2 stairwells. PARTICIPANTS: Approximately 2800 municipal employees and 1000 daily visitors. INTERVENTION: All stairwells received door wraps and point-of-decision and wayfinding prompts. Environmental enhancements were installed in 1 stairwell in each of the 2 buildings: wall paint, upgraded stair treads and handrails, artwork, light-emitting diode (LED) lighting, fire-rated glass doors, and removal of security locks on at least the ground floor. MEASURES: Staff surveys and focus groups, electronic and direct measures of stair and elevator use occurred at baseline and over 3 years of phased implementation and follow-up. ANALYSIS: analysis. RESULTS: The prompts were associated with a significant increase in stair use (odds ratio [OR] = 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.31-1.41), with an average absolute increase of 3.2%. Environmental enhancements were associated with an additional significant increase in stair use (OR = 1.31; 95% CI: 1.25-1.37) beyond prompts alone with an average absolute increase of a further 3.5% that was sustained for 1 year. The initial increases in stair use with prompts alone were not sustained. CONCLUSION: Implementing environmental stairwell enhancements in office buildings increased stair usage in a sustained manner beyond that achieved by prompts alone.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it