MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416339491 · doi:10.1016/j.cities.2025.106642

Development and application of a geospatial index of urban playability for young children

2025· article· en· W4416339491 on OpenAlex
Emily Gemmell, Alicia Cavenaugh, Mariana Brussoni, Martin Guhn, Federico Andrade‐Rivas, Ismam Imon, Michael Bräuer

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCities · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of VictoriaLearning PartnershipMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsNeighbourhood (mathematics)DisadvantagedCensusGeospatial analysisIndex (typography)DestinationsPopulationWalkabilityTerrain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Playing outdoors supports young children's physical, cognitive and social-emotional health and development. However, urban environments may limit children's outdoor play. We developed an evidence-based index to evaluate neighbourhood supportiveness for young children's outdoor free play, and applied it across 35 Canadian cities. From an evidence-based, theoretical framework for neighbourhood playability among children, 2–6 years, we identified five major domains influencing outdoor free play: spaces for play , social , traffic/pedestrian and natural environments , and child-relevant destinations . We selected indicators for each domain from open-source geospatial, satellite and census data, and weighted indicators based on findings from a survey of experts. We applied the index at the postal code level, and examined associations between playability, population density and material advantage/disadvantage. We found wide variation (52–77 %) in neighbourhood playability within the same city. However, average playability differences between cities was relatively small (≤ 20 %). Higher density areas had higher traffic/pedestrian and child-relevant destination scores, but lower social and natural environment scores, while space for play showed no relationship with density (persons/km 2 ). Within study cities, 39 % of young children lived in neighbourhoods where at least one domain averaged at or below the 10th percentile score. For a majority of cities (20/35), materially disadvantaged neighbourhoods had lower playability scores. Across Canadian cities, children's access to playable neighbourhoods varies widely. The playability index enables small area-level assessment of supportiveness, barriers and facilitators to young children's outdoor play. The theoretical framework and methodological approach may be adapted to develop indices of playability across diverse urban contexts. • A novel playability index was developed to assess urban/suburban environments for young children's outdoor play. • Playability index domains include: spaces for play, social environments, traffic/pedestrian environments, natural environments and child-relevant destinations. • Children experience wide disparities residential neighbourhood playability within the same city. • Playability scores were generally higher in materially advantaged and lower density neighbourhoods. • The index provides a high-level tool to evaluate young children's equitable access to playable neighbourhoods in cities.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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