Housing characteristics and health in urban China: A comparative study of rural migrants and urban locals
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
Abstract China's internal migration has produced a massive population of rural‐to‐urban migrants who face more structural and policy disadvantages in cities, compared with urban locals. The two social groups potentially differ both in their housing characteristics and in the health effects of these housing characteristics. These two differences are fundamentally distinct components that make up the overall impact of housing on health disparity between urban locals and rural‐to‐urban migrants. Using the 2017 China Migrants Dynamic Survey data, this study explores the differing connections of housing characteristics and health between the two groups in today's urban China. Overall, housing type and size have greater effects on the health of migrants, whereas housing instability has a greater impact on the health of urban locals. We utilize the Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition method to uncover to what extent the disparity in health between the two groups is due to the difference in their housing characteristics or the difference in the health effect of housing characteristics. In so doing, this study reveals two interrelated but distinct sources of housing‐induced health disparity between urban locals and migrants in urban China.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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