MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320065998 · doi:10.1289/isee.2022.p-0786

Quantification of green and walkable neighbourhoods across the distribution of social and material deprivation in Metro Vancouver, Canada

2022· article· en· W4320065998 on OpenAlexaffabout
Katherine White, Kate R. Weinberger, Connor Wolff, Trevor Dummer, Lawrence R. Frank

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsVancouver Community CollegeUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeighbourhood (mathematics)WalkabilitySocial deprivationGeographyBuilt environmentLand coverLand useEnvironmental healthEcologyMathematicsBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIM: Along with other environmental exposures, both neighbourhood walkability, and greenspace exposure and access have been linked to many diverse health benefits. Previous work has examined the spatial relationship of built and natural environments according to levels of neighbourhood deprivation; however, less is known about how these relationships may vary when different greenspace metrics are used. This work examines how normalized differences vegetation index (NDVI), tree canopy cover, green land cover, and park count metrics relate to walkability, and how these neighbourhood characteristics associate with both social and material deprivation. METHODS: Greenspace exposure was measured using NDVI, tree canopy cover, and green land cover, while park access was quantified by the number of designated public parks within 1000m and 400m network buffers for each six-digit postal-code centroid in Metro Vancouver, Canada. Local area deprivation was measured using the 2016 Material and Social Deprivation Index (MSDI). Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated to compare these neighbourhood characteristics. RESULTS: Walkability was positively associated with social deprivation (1000m r = 0.48; 400m r = 0.48, p < .01), while walkability has a weak inverse relationship with material deprivation (1000m r = -0.21, p < .01). Tree canopy was negatively related to both social (1000m r = -0.23, 400m r = -0.23, p < .01) and material deprivation (1000m r = -0.24, 400m r = -0.23, p < .01). In contrast, the relationship between park count and both deprivation measures was weak. CONCLUSION: In this study, areas with greater social and material deprivation tend to have less greenspace, but not necessarily less park access. The identification of neighbourhoods with higher material deprivation, low walkability, and low greenspace, may be prioritized by urban planners and decision makers as possible locations for additional greenspace allocation. KEYWORDS: greenspace, walkability, social deprivation, material deprivation

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207