MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7108319461 · doi:10.17603/ds2-5467-r725

Developing a Dynamic Social Vulnerability Index for Public Health (DSVI-PH) Using Location-based Data

2025· dataset· en· W7108319461 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial vulnerabilityVulnerability (computing)Index (typography)Public healthVulnerability indexConstruct (python library)Vulnerability assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study developed a Dynamic Social Vulnerability Index for Public Health (DSVI-PH) by integrating the CDC’s social vulnerability index with Meta population movement data and hospital location datasets. We chose Hurricane Beryl (2024) as a target disaster and captured daily changes in vulnerability through Meta Data for Good Movement data, which is unlike static annual social vulnerability index data. Summary of Findings DSVI-PH captured daily fluctuations in social vulnerability by evacuation, return migration, and hospital accessibility compared to the current static social vulnerability index. Hot and cold spot analysis revealed that spatial disparities within major cities (Houston, San Antonio, and Corpus Christi) influenced the distribution of vulnerability. Policy and Practice Implications Policymakers can use DSVI-PH to guide real-time allocation of resources, prioritizing highly vulnerable populations. DSVI-PH provides a quantitative change of latent construct (social vulnerability), so we can set up the quantified adaptive recovery policies.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.300
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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 venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→