How our homes impact our health: using a COVID-19 informed approach to examine urban apartment housing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The COVID-19 global health crisis is undeniably a global housing crisis. Our study focuses on quality of life in urban mid- and high-rise apartment housing, the fastest growing housing types in many cities around the world. This housing typology presents unique challenges relating to connection to nature, daylight and fresh air. Design/methodology/approach This multi-disciplinary literature review analyzes more than 100 published papers from peer-reviewed sources from environmental psychology, building science and architecture relevant to quality of life in high-rise housing, as well as more than 40 recent newspaper and magazine articles about the possible impacts of COVID-19 on housing. We identify synergies between passive design strategies and health-promoting architecture or “restorative environmental design” principles. Findings Post-pandemic, health-promoting apartment housing design must prioritize (1) window placement and views that support stress recovery and restoration; (2) lighting levels based on spaces that can satisfy multiple uses and users; (3) bedrooms designed for restful sleep that contribute to circadian regulation; (4) living rooms with better indoor air quality, with a focus on natural ventilation; (5) access to nature, through the purposeful design of balconies and (6) unit sizes and layouts that enable physical distancing and prevent crowding. Originality/value We identify new social and environmental design priorities in the form of evidence-based design principles to inform and promote healthy and restorative living environments for residents in apartment housing.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".