Exploring Youth Experiences in Nature Through a Health Equity Lens: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research demonstrates that for youth, connections to nature are protective health assets and that socio-economic status impacts health outcomes and opportunities. Less is known about how the intersection of youth connections to nature and socio-economic status shape health experiences and findings that do exist are mixed. The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand how youth in the Niagara Region of Canada experience nature, with attention to their socio-economic status. Eight youth between the ages of 11 and 15 were recruited from community organizations and contacts at Brock University and participated in a semi-structured interview. These youth all self-identified as having positive experiences in nature as part of the eligibility requirements for the study. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Two themes were identified from the results 1) connections between nature and participants were strong, regardless of a participant’s socio-economic circumstances and 2) experiences in nature appear to be influenced by SES in terms of the ways youth were able to connect with nature through things like resources and access. Findings are discussed through the lens of the Central Capabilities Approach. A strengths-based approach guided this study.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".