MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005367954 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100538

Living liveable? RESIDE's evaluation of the “Liveable Neighborhoods” planning policy on the health supportive behaviors and wellbeing of residents in Perth, Western Australia

2020· article· en· W3005367954 on OpenAlexafffund
Paula Hooper, Sarah Foster, Fiona Bull, Matthew Knuiman, Hayley Christian, Anna Timperio, Lisa Wood, Gina Trapp, Bryan Boruff, Jacinta Francis, Cecily Strange, Hannah Badland, Lucy Gunn, Ryan Falconer, Vincent Learnihan, Gavin R. McCormack, Takemi Sugiyama, Billie Giles‐Corti

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Population Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWorld Health OrganizationNational Heart Foundation of AustraliaRMIT UniversityHealthway
KeywordsEnvironmental planningGerontologyGeographyEnvironmental resource managementSociologyMedicineEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The RESIDential Environments (RESIDE) project is a unique longitudinal natural experiment designed to evaluate the health impacts of the “Liveable Neighbourhoods” planning policy, which was introduced by the Western Australian government to create more walkable suburbs. To summarize the RESIDE evidence of the impact of the planning policy on a range of health-supportive behaviours and wellbeing outcomes and to assess the consistency and direction of the estimates of associations. An audit of 26 RESIDE research papers (from 2003 to 2012) identified the number of positive associations (statistically significant and consistent with policy expectations), negative associations (statistically significant and inconsistent with policy expectations), and null findings from multiple-exposure models between objective and perceived measures of 20 policy design requirements and 13 health-supportive behaviors and wellbeing outcomes. In total 332 eligible estimates of associations (n = 257 objective measures and n = 75 perceived measures) were identified. Positively significant findings were detected for: 57% of walking estimates with objectively measured policy design features (negative = 3%; null = 40%) (n = 115) and 54% perceived measures (negative = 0%; null = 33%) (n = 27); 42% of sense of community estimates with objectively measured of policy design features (negative = 8%; null = 50%) (n = 12) and 61% perceived measures (negative = 8%; null = 31%) (n = 13); 39% of safety or crime-related estimates with objectively measured of policy design features (negative = 22%; null = 39%) (n = 28) and 100% perceived measures (n = 7). All (n = 4) estimates for mental health outcomes with objectively measured policy-related design features were positively significant. The synthesis of findings suggests that new suburban communities built in accordance with the “Liveable Neighbourhoods” policy have the potential to encourage health supportive behaviors and wellbeing outcomes including transport and recreation walking, and to create neighborhoods with a stronger sense of community where residents may feel safer.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSM - Population HealthSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207