Defining Urban Health for Strategic Action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cities play a dominant and expanding role in human lives and civilization. As such, urban health is an increasingly important facet of public, global, and planetary health, and its profound links to other areas of sustainable development make it an important nexus issue. However, there is considerable variation in how urban health is conceived and understood, including different ideas about its scope and boundaries, proper remit, subjects, protagonists, locus and sources of authority, and relationships to other rubrics. These differences derive from the complexity of urban environments and the emergence and evolution of the field of urban health from actions and perspectives spanning multiple sectors, scales, and domains. Recognizing the value of diverse viewpoints and usages, we explore and clarify several conceptual issues and debates and propose a definition of urban health as a shared basis for strategic action.
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 | 0.022 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.081 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".