MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380301671 · doi:10.1088/2752-5309/acdd8a

Inclusion of child-relevant data in the development and validation of heat vulnerability indices: a commentary

2023· article· en· W4380301671 on OpenAlexaff
Kate R. Weinberger, Blean Girma, Jane E. Clougherty, Perry Sheffield

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Extreme heatPopulationInclusion (mineral)Vulnerability indexHeat stressHeat illnessEnvironmental healthMedicineGeographyPsychologyClimate changeComputer securitySocial psychologyComputer scienceMeteorologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The health impacts of extreme heat have been repeatedly linked to increased rates of illness and death. Research to date has documented a number of subpopulations at heightened risk during periods of extreme heat. While there is a large body of research linking heat to adverse health outcomes among adults, an emerging literature has also identified infants and young children as a heat-vulnerable population. Thus, there is an opportunity to further improve strategies and tools developed to prevent heat-related illness and death through consideration of this population. In this commentary, we examine the extent to which data that capture the vulnerability of children is incorporated into the development and validation of a specific tool: the heat vulnerability index (HVI), a tool used to map spatial patterns of heat vulnerability within urban areas. Additionally, we make recommendations for how HVIs might be expanded or targeted to capture the impact of heat on younger populations.

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)0.010
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 score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research HealthSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207