MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6945132925 · doi:10.24928/2025/0290

House Retrofits: Impacts of Sustainability Measures on Health

2025· article· en· W6945132925 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent UniversityNottingham Trent University
KeywordsRetrofittingSustainabilityEconomic shortageStock (firearms)Citizen journalismEmpirical researchPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The UK faces an estimated demand for 345,000 new homes annually.Retrofitting the existing housing stock presents significant opportunities to mitigate housing shortages while addressing sustainability challenges.However, current retrofit initiatives have predominantly prioritised energy efficiency while neglecting health implications from retrofits.This paper examines the relationship between sustainable housing retrofits and health outcomes, exploring strategies to address these interrelated challenges.A literature review identifies links between health considerations in retrofits through the application of lean principles, particularly from a user value generation perspective.The paper highlights synergies between health, lifestyle, and technology factors and Lean.The findings indicate the need for robust data on the health impacts of housing retrofits, as well as participatory approaches that enable the prioritisation of needs of occupants.The evidence highlights the need for empirical research to develop solutions that integrate health considerations into retrofit policy and practice, ensuring that retrofits deliver benefits for both occupants' well-being and environmental sustainability.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Conference of the International Group for Lean ConstructionSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207