Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38898070›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Assessing spatiotemporal population density dynamics from 2000 to 2020 in megacities using urban and rural morphologies.

Jing Xie, Nan Wei, Quan Gao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jing XieSchool of Geography and Planning, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Nan WeiSchool of Geography and Planning, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Quan GaoSchool of Geography and Planning, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China. gaoq59@mail.sysu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 42201240National Natural Science Foundation of China 42301208
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid urbanization has resulted in the substantial population growth in metropolitan areas. However, existing research on population change of the cities predominantly draws on grid statistical data at the administrative level, overlooking the intra-urban variegation of population change. Particularly, there is a lack of attention given to the spatio-temporal change of population across different urban forms and functions. This paper therefore fills in the lacuna by clarifying the spatio-temporal characteristics of population growth in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA) from 2000 to 2020 through the methods of local climate zone (LCZ) scheme and urban-rural gradients. The results showed that: (1) High population density was observed in the compact high-rise (LCZ 1) areas, with a noticeable decline along urban-rural gradients. (2) The city centers of GBA experienced the most significant population growth, while certain urban fringes and rural areas witnessed significant population shrinkage. (3) The rate of growth tended to slow down after 2010, but the uneven development of population-based urbanization was also noticeable, as urbanization and industrialization varied across different LCZ types and cities in GBA. This paper therefore contributes to a deeper understanding of population change and urbanization by clarifying their spatio-temporal contingences at landscape level.

Indexed as

CitiesPopulation DensityPopulation DynamicsRural PopulationSpatio-Temporal AnalysisUrbanizationUrban PopulationChinaHumansPopulation GrowthGreater Bay AreaLocal climate zonesPopulationUrbanizationUrban–rural morphologyWorldPop

Identifiers

PMID38898070
PMCPMC11187102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.