Green-Blue Spaces and Mental Health: A Longitudinal Data Linkage Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionA growing evidence base indicates health benefits are associated with access to green-blue spaces (GBS), such as beaches and parks. However, few studies have examined associations with changes in access to GBS over time.
 Objectives and ApproachWe have linked cross-sector data collected within Wales, United Kingdom, quarterly from 2008 to 2019, to examine the impact of GBS access on individual-level well-being and common mental health disorders (CMD). We created a longitudinal dataset of GBS access metrics, derived from satellite and administrative data sources, for 1.4 million homes in Wales. These household-level metrics were linked to individuals using the Welsh Demographic Service Dataset within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. Linkage to Welsh Longitudinal General Practice data within SAIL enabled us to identify individual-level CMD over time. We also linked individual-level self-reported GBS use and well-being data from the National Survey for Wales (NSW) to routine data for cross-sectional survey participants.
 ResultsWe created a longitudinal cohort panel capturing all 2.84 million adults aged 16+ living in Wales between 2008 and 2019 and with a general practitioner (GP) registration. Individual-level health data and household-level environmental metrics were linked for each quarter an individual is in the study. Household addresses were linked to 97% of the cohort, creating 110+ million rows of anonymously linked cross-sector data. The cohort provides an average follow-up period of 8 years, during which 565,168 (20%) adults received at least one CMD diagnosis or symptom.
 Conclusion / ImplicationsThis example of multi-sectoral data linkage across multiple environmental and administrative data sources has created a rich data source, which we will use toquantify the impact of changes in GBS access on individual–level CMD and well-being. This evidence will inform policy in the areas of health, planning and the environment.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".