HealthyPlan.City: A Web Tool to Support Urban Environmental Equity and Public Health in Canadian Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban environmental factors such as air quality, heat islands, and access to greenspaces and community amenities impact public health. Some vulnerable populations such as low-income groups, children, older adults, new immigrants, and visible minorities live in areas with fewer beneficial conditions, and therefore, face greater health risks. Planning and advocating for equitable healthy urban environments requires systematic analysis of reliable spatial data to identify where vulnerable populations intersect with positive or negative urban/environmental characteristics. To facilitate this effort in Canada, we developed HealthyPlan.City ( https://healthyplan.city/ ), a freely available web mapping platform for users to visualize the spatial patterns of built environment indicators, vulnerable populations, and environmental inequity within over 125 Canadian cities. This tool helps users identify areas within Canadian cities where relatively higher proportions of vulnerable populations experience lower than average levels of beneficial environmental conditions, which we refer to as Equity priority areas. Using nationally standardized environmental data from satellite imagery and other large geospatial databases and demographic data from the Canadian Census, HealthyPlan.City provides a block-by-block snapshot of environmental inequities in Canadian cities. The tool aims to support urban planners, public health professionals, policy makers, and community organizers to identify neighborhoods where targeted investments and improvements to the local environment would simultaneously help communities address environmental inequities, promote public health, and adapt to climate change. In this paper, we report on the key considerations that informed our approach to developing this tool and describe the current web-based application.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".