MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407819564 · doi:10.1016/j.geomat.2025.100051

Urban green spaces and mental wellbeing: A methodology for measuring structural characteristics of individual-level green space exposure and its associations with wellbeing

2025· article· en· W4407819564 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGEOMATICA · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrban green spaceSpace (punctuation)Mental healthPsychologyEnvironmental healthMedicineComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of people living with mental disorders is increasing worldwide. Considering rapid global urbanization, research on the effects of urban environments on mental wellbeing is becoming crucial, particularly regarding the role of green spaces. This paper analyzes data collected using a smartphone-based toolkit, gathering multimodal data such as participants’ photographs, GPX tracks, and categorical emotion tags in response to urban environments. Through exploratory, semi-automated analysis, urban green spaces are identified and explored in relation to mental wellbeing using statistical methods. The proportion and distribution of green spaces are quantitatively analyzed through image analysis. This novel method of seamlessly integrating data collection and analysis allows for a distinction between the effects of the directly and consciously perceived environment and the indirect, unconsciously perceived environment. Preliminary results indicate that green spaces in everyday environments may positively impact mental wellbeing. There is potential for integrating green spaces, particularly in city centers. These findings enable numerous empirical studies to investigate the influence of green spaces on mental wellbeing and represent a valuable extension of the evidence base for urban planning and policy decisions. The key benefits of this work lie in its consideration of everyday perceptions of green spaces and its ability to overcome limitations of previous studies through more detailed data collection and efficient automated data analysis. • Efficient semi-automated method to determine green spaces from multi-modal user-generated data. • Self-reported well-being in daily urban action spaces. • New mobile diary app to collect and tag multimodal data.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.226 · 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