Can we advance individual-level heat-health research through the application of stochastic weather generators?

2021 ◽  
Vol 164 (1-2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Verdin ◽  
Kathryn Grace ◽  
Frank Davenport ◽  
Chris Funk ◽  
Greg Husak
2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Salmond ◽  
Peter Crampton

INTRODUCTION: Measures of socioeconomic position (SEP) are widely used in health research. AIM: To provide future researchers with empirically based guidance about the relative utility of five measures of SEP in predicting health outcomes. METHODS: Data from 12 488 adults were obtained from the 2006 New Zealand Health Survey. Seven health-related outcome measures with expected variations by SEP are modelled using five measures of SEP: a census-based small-area index of relative socioeconomic deprivation, NZDep2006; a questionnaire-based individual-level index of socioeconomic deprivation, NZiDep; an index of living standards, ELSI; education, measured by highest qualification; and equivalised household income. RESULTS: After including the individual measure of deprivation, the area-based measure of deprivation adds useful explanatory power, and, separately, the broader spectrum provided by the living standards index adds only a small amount of extra explanatory power. The education and household income variables add little extra explanatory power. DISCUSSION: Both NZiDep and ELSI are useful health-outcome predictors. NZiDep is the cheapest data to obtain and less prone to missing data. The area index, NZDep, is a useful addition to the arsenal of individual SEP indicators, and is a reasonable alternative to them where the use of individual measures is impracticable. Education and household income, using commonly used measurement tools, may be of limited use in research if more proximal indicators of SEP are available. NZDep and NZiDep are cost-effective measures of SEP in health research. Other or additional measures may be useful if costs allow and/or for topic-related hypothesis testing. KEYWORDS: Deprivation; inequalities; living standards; New Zealand; socioeconomic position


Climate ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sushant Mehan ◽  
Tian Guo ◽  
Margaret Gitau ◽  
Dennis C. Flanagan

2004 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 175-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
B Qian ◽  
S Gameda ◽  
H Hayhoe ◽  
R De Jong ◽  
A Bootsma

Author(s):  
George Morris ◽  
Marco Martuzzi ◽  
Lora Fleming ◽  
Francesca Racioppi ◽  
Srdan Matic

Adequate funding, careful planning, and good governance are central to delivering quality research in any field. Yet, the strategic directions for research, the mechanisms through which topics emerge, and the priorities assigned are equally deserving of attention. The need to understand the role played by the environment and to manage the physical environment and the human activities which bear upon it in pursuit of health, well-being, and equity are long established. These imperatives drive environmental health research as a key branch of scientific inquiry. Targeted research over many years, applying established methods, has informed society’s understanding of the toxic, infectious, allergenic, and physical threats to health from our physical surroundings and how these may be managed. Essentially hazard-focused research continues to deliver policy-relevant findings while simultaneously posing questions to be addressed through further research. Environmental health in the 21st century is, however, confronted by additional challenges of a rather different character. These include the need to understand, in a better and more policy-relevant way, the contributions of the environment to health and equity in complex interaction with other societal and individual-level influences (a so-called socioecological model). Also important are the potential of especially green and blue natural environments to improve health and well-being and promote equity, and the health implications of new approaches to production and consumption, such as the circular economy. Such challenges add breadth, depth, and richness to the environmental health research agenda, but when combined with the existential and public health threat of humanity’s detrimental impact on the Earth’s systems, they entail a need for new and better strategies for scientific inquiry. As we confront the challenges and uncertainties of the Anthropocene, the complexity expands, the stakes become sky-high, and diverse interests and values clash. Thus, the pressure on environmental health researchers to evolve and engage with stakeholders and reach out to the widest constituency of policy and practice has never been greater, nor has the need to organize to deliver. A disparate range of contextual factors have become pertinent when scoping the now significantly extended, territory for environmental health research. Moreover, the challenges of prioritizing among the candidate topics for investigation have scarcely been greater.


2005 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 765-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Hammarström ◽  
Urban Janlert

Unemployment figures are high worldwide, and this should be a challenge for both researchers and politicians. Public health research has a tradition of descriptive studies among the unemployed at the individual level and has to a limited extent been engaged in interventive and preventive trials to study the effect of different measures to counter unemployment. The article gives a brief review of the development of postwar unemployment research and proposes an agenda for unemployment research within public health for the coming years.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fosco M. Vesely ◽  
Livia Paleari ◽  
Ermes Movedi ◽  
Gianni Bellocchi ◽  
Roberto Confalonieri

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document