Substandard South Auckland housing: findings from a healthy homes initiative temperature study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT There is strong evidence demonstrating cold housing prevalence in Aotearoa New Zealand. Whānau (families) were recruited from a healthy homes programme based in South Auckland. Forty whānau consented to participate in a temperature‐based study that assessed the ability of homes to protect against outdoor temperatures. In this observational study, temperature sensors measured night‐time indoor temperature every 15 min from May 2020 to October 2020. Whānau were provided with healthy homes education and practical suggestions to help make homes warmer and dryer. Notably, each device (and house) spent 85% or more of the time below the World Health Organization Housing and Health Guidelines recommended minimum indoor temperature of 20°C for vulnerable groups. The lower standard of 18°C for more general populations referenced in the Healthy Homes Standards was not met over 60% of the time. Over a quarter of the time temperatures measured inside homes were below 12°C. If Māori and Pacific whānau continue to live in substandard housing due to residential inequities, they will continue to experience inequitable health outcomes related to cold housing. Solutions include the anticipated Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations, supports for tenants and support with housing‐related costs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".