MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400614530 · doi:10.2196/56510

The Automatic Context Measurement Tool (ACMT) to Compile Participant-Specific Built and Social Environment Measures for Health Research: Development and Usability Study

2024· article· en· W4400614530 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Weipeng Zhou, Amy J. Youngbloom, Xinyang Ren, Brian E. Saelens, Sean D. Mooney, Stephen J. Mooney

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPopulationUsabilityContext (archaeology)Computer scienceGeographic information systemGeographyWorld Wide WebCartographyHuman–computer interactionEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The environment shapes health behaviors and outcomes. Studies exploring this influence have been limited to research groups with the geographic information systems expertise required to develop built and social environment measures (eg, groups that include a researcher with geographic information system expertise). OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to develop an open-source, user-friendly, and privacy-preserving tool for conveniently linking built, social, and natural environmental variables to study participant addresses. METHODS: We built the automatic context measurement tool (ACMT). The ACMT comprises two components: (1) a geocoder, which identifies a latitude and longitude given an address (currently limited to the United States), and (2) a context measure assembler, which computes measures from publicly available data sources linked to a latitude and longitude. ACMT users access both of these components using an RStudio/RShiny-based web interface that is hosted within a Docker container, which runs on a local computer and keeps user data stored in local to protect sensitive data. We illustrate ACMT with 2 use cases: one comparing population density patterns within several major US cities, and one identifying correlates of cannabis licensure status in Washington State. RESULTS: In the population density analysis, we created a line plot showing the population density (x-axis) in relation to distance from the center of the city (y-axis, using city hall location as a proxy) for Seattle, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City, Nashville, Houston, and Boston with the distances being 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, and 5000 m. We found the population density tended to decrease as distance from city hall increased except for Nashville and Houston, 2 cities that are notably more sprawling than the others. New York City had a significantly higher population density than the others. We also observed that Los Angeles and Seattle had similarly low population densities within up to 2500 m of City Hall. In the cannabis licensure status analysis, we gathered neighborhood measures such as age, sex, commute time, and education. We found the strongest predictive characteristic of cannabis license approval to be the count of female children aged 5 to 9 years and the proportion of females aged 62 to 64 years who were not in the labor force. However, after accounting for Bonferroni error correction, none of the measures were significantly associated with cannabis retail license approval status. CONCLUSIONS: The ACMT can be used to compile environmental measures to study the influence of environmental context on population health. The portable and flexible nature of ACMT makes it optimal for neighborhood study research seeking to attribute environmental data to specific locations within the United States.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.092
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.092
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.424
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.067 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicData-Driven Disease SurveillanceFrench-language works237,207