The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding and Harnessing the Health Effects of Rapid Urbanization in China
Abstract
China is undergoing a rapid transition from a rural to an urban society. This societal change is a consequence of a national drive toward economic prosperity. Rapid urbanization impacts on infrastructure, environmental health and human wellbeing. Unlike many cases of urban expansion, Chinese urbanization has led to containment, rather than to increase, in the spread of infectious diseases. Conversely, the incidence of chronic conditions such as cardiovascular and metabolic diseases has risen, with higher rates occurring in urban regions. This rural-urban gradient in disease incidence seems not to be a reflection simply of more aggressive diagnosis or healthcare access. Other diseases exhibit little rural versus urban differences (e.g., liver cancer or respiratory disease), or even occur at a higher rate in the rural population (e.g., esophageal cancer). This article examines the impact of this changing demographic on environmental health and human wellbeing in China. Lessons learned from epidemiological studies mostly carried out in Europe and the U.S. may not be directly transferable to China. We advocate that there is now a need to establish robust systems of accurate data collection, a Chinese biobank network to facilitate the profiling of human health effects, and relevant randomized controlled trials to identify effective interventions in the Chinese urbanized setting. Such studies could allow for the future implementation of disease-preventive strategies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
Self-citationThe Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa066082 · Cited by 5,007
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702
Self-citation
Cited by
Association between Urban Greenspace and Health: A Systematic Review of Literature
Gianfredi, V., Buffoli, M., Rebecchi, A., Croci, R., Oradini-Alacreu, A., Stirparo, G., Marino, A., Odone, A., Capolongo, S., & Signorelli, C. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18105137 · Cited by 203
Factors of physical activity among Chinese children and adolescents: a systematic review
Lu, C., Stolk, R. P., Sauer, P. J. J., Sijtsma, A., Wiersma, R., Huang, G., & Corpeleijn, E. (2017) · International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · doi:10.1186/s12966-017-0486-y · Cited by 155
Zeng, C., Lyu, B., Deng, S., Yu, Y., Li, N., Lin, W., Li, D., & Chen, Q. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17093238 · Cited by 73
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhu, Y.-G., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Li, H., Jones, K. C., & Martin, F. L.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2011-05-04
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 5099-5104
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2023048788
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 4.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.