How Do Urban Environments Affect Young People’s Mental Health? A Novel Conceptual Framework to Bridge Public Health, Planning, and Neurourbanism
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
Childhood and adolescence are crucial periods for mental and social development. Currently, mental illness among young people is a global epidemic, and rates of disorders such as depression and anxiety are rising. Urban living, compared with rural living, is linked with a higher risk of serious mental illness, which is important because the world is urbanizing faster than ever before. Urban environments and their landscapes, designs, and features influence mental health and well-being. However, no conceptual frameworks to date have detailed the effect of urban environments on young people's mental health, and few studies have considered the growing role of digital and social media in this relationship, leading to calls for the development of holistic approaches to describe this relationship. This article synthesizes existing knowledge on urban places (both built and natural environments) and mental health in the public health and urban planning literature and examines the emerging field of neurourbanism (a multidisciplinary study of the effect of urban environments on mental health and brain activity) to enhance current practice and research. We developed 2 novel conceptual frameworks (1 research-oriented, 1 practice-oriented), adapted from Bronfenbrenner's socioecological model, that focus on the relationship between urban environments and young people's mental health. We added a digital and social media contextual level to the socioecological model, and we applied a multilayer concept to highlight potential cross-field interactions and collaborations. The proposed frameworks can help to guide future practice and research in this area.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it