Towards healthy school neighbourhoods: A baseline analysis in Greater London
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creating healthy environments around schools is important to promote healthy childhood development and is a critical component of public health. In this paper we present a tool to characterize exposure to multiple urban environment features within 400 m (5–10 min walking distance) of schools in Greater London. We modelled joint exposure to air pollution (NO2 and PM2.5), access to public greenspace, food environment, and road safety for 2,929 schools, employing a Bayesian non-parametric approach based on the Dirichlet Process Mixture modelling. We identified 12 latent clusters of schools with similar exposure profiles and observed some spatial clustering patterns. Socioeconomic and ethnicity disparities were manifested with respect to exposure profiles. Specifically, three clusters (containing 645 schools) showed the highest joint exposure to air pollution, poor food environment, and unsafe roads and were characterized with high deprivation. The neighbourhood of the most deprived cluster of schools had a median of 2.5 ha greenspace, 29.0 µg/m3 of NO2, 19.3 µg/m3 of PM2.5, 20 fast food retailers, and five child pedestrian crashes over a three-year period. The neighbourhood of the least deprived cluster of schools had a median of 21.8 ha greenspace, 15.6 µg/m3 of NO2, 15.1 µg/m3 of PM2.5, 2 fast food retailers, and one child pedestrian crash over a three-year period. To have a school-level understanding of exposure levels, we then benchmarked schools based on the probability of exceeding the median exposure to various features of interest. Our study accounts for multiple exposures, enabling us to highlight spatial distribution of exposure profile clusters, and to identify predominant exposure to urban environment features for each cluster of schools. Our findings can help relevant stakeholders, such as schools and public health authorities, to compare schools based on their exposure levels, prioritize interventions, and design local policies that target the schools most in need.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.092 | 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".