Scoping review of environmental urban health research in America and Europe, 1992-2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Recent reports from United Nations estimate that the world population will reach 9.3 billion in 2050, 75% in urban areas. Until a couple of decades ago a growing interest in the field of urban health research could be observed. Among its topics environmental health has a leading role. The aim of this study was to explore bibliometric and methodological characteristics of scientific publications on Environmental Urban Health (EUH), in America and Europe during 1992-2020. METHODS: A Scoping Review was conducted. Literature was searched in PubMed, Bireme-BVS Google Scholar, Redalyc and Dialnet databases, using as search terms: urban health, research, theory, methods, methodology, Social Determination of Health and Inequity. PRISMA guide was used to guarantee the quality and reproducibility of the search, selection and analysis protocol. A qualitative synthesis was carried out for the specific topic of EUH for type of research, country, journals and the study period. RESULTS:5177 manuscript were identified, of which 735 were selected. 285 of these corresponded to research on EUH. 74% were observational studies, 16% qualitative research, 13% case studies, and 13.5% mixed methods research. 40% were conducted in North America, 30% in Europe, 23% in Latin America, and 7% were multicenter. 67% of the Research Centers that published these manuscripts were from United States, Brazil, Canada, Spain and United Kingdom. 119 journals published articles on EUH during study period but only 6, published 30% of these. The highest proportion of publications was made between 2011 and 2020. CONCLUSIONS:The epidemiological research is predominant in EUH field, with studies carried out and published mainly in North America. The publication has been carried out mainly in English-speaking journals, which implies cultural challenges and access to knowledge for the research and action agendas in urban environmental health for Latin America and other regions of the south. KEYWORDS: Environmental health, Urban Health, scoping review, America, Europe
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".