MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gentrification and mental health inequities: a scoping review

2025· review· en· W4414159453 on OpenAlexafffund
Justine Pineault, Clara Blache-Pichette, Christine Loignon, Martine Shareck

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Science & Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Planning and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et CultureCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsGentrificationMental healthPublic healthSocial determinants of healthSocial medicineUrban planningSocial environmentCommunity participation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The association between gentrification and general health has been established in the scientific literature. Less is known about the relationship between gentrification and mental health at a population level, and for specific subgroups. This scoping review aimed to document (1) the relationships between gentrification and mental health in the general population, and among specific social groups, and (2) the mechanisms which might explain why gentrification impacts the health of specific social groups more than others. A framework for understanding the pathways by which neighborhood gentrification may lead to mental health inequities guided the study. We included qualitative and quantitative studies published from 2000 to 2024 in English or French. We identified 40 peer-reviewed studies through database searches. A mix of positive and negative effects of gentrification on mental health were found in samples of adults, while only negative effects on mental health were found for children, young adults and older adults. A mix of positive and negative effects were found in samples of residents in gentrifying neighborhoods and for residents who had lived in a gentrifying neighborhood for more than 3 years. Only better mental health outcomes were found among gentrifiers, while only worse mental health outcomes were found among long-term and displaced residents. Findings from this scoping review can guide future research and urban planning as it documents gentrification's effects on mental health and explores why gentrification may impact the health of specific social groups more than others. • Gentrification's effects on mental health vary by residents' characteristics. • Studies only found positive mental health outcomes for gentrifiers. • Studies only found negative mental health outcomes for long-term residents. • Studies only found negative mental health outcomes for youth and older adults. • Low-income ethnic minorities and women were most affected by gentrification.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Science & MedicineSame topicUrban Planning and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207