Journal Articles

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915

Browse

Author: search.filters.author.Gong J

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Comparative Study of Standardised Inputs and Inconsistent Outputs in LCA Software
    (MDPI (Basel, Switzerland), 2025-09-04) Gong J; Vishnupriya V; Wilkinson S; Shrestha PP; Shrestha K
    Motivation: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a valuable tool for quantifying environmental impacts in construction. However, inconsistencies between software outputs may compromise effective decision-making. Knowledge Gap: In New Zealand’s construction sector, practitioners have limited guidance in selecting suitable LCA tools due to gaps in software scope, data transparency, and the quality of result interpretation. Aim and Objectives: This study investigates inconsistencies in results produced by eight widely used LCA software tools and identifies the key factors contributing to these variations. Research Method: This study uses a comparative analysis with data from a timber-framed warehouse project in Auckland, New Zealand. Eight software tools (SimaPro V9.0, openLCA V2.0, LCAQuick V3.5, Building Carbon Calculator V1.0, CCaLC2 V3.1, eTool V5.0, One Click LCA, and Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings V5.4) were evaluated across 14 environmental impact categories using standardised inputs. Preliminary Findings: Substantial inconsistencies were observed even with standardised inputs, although SimaPro V9.0 and openLCA V2.0 provided the most consistent results. These findings highlight the importance of software selection for reliable environmental assessments. Research Significance: This study aids industry practitioners in selecting effective LCA tools for sustainable construction practices.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Sex differences in dementia risk and risk factors: Individual-participant data analysis using 21 cohorts across six continents from the COSMIC consortium.
    (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2023-08-01) Gong J; Harris K; Lipnicki DM; Castro-Costa E; Lima-Costa MF; Diniz BS; Xiao S; Lipton RB; Katz MJ; Wang C; Preux P-M; Guerchet M; Gbessemehlan A; Ritchie K; Ancelin M-L; Skoog I; Najar J; Sterner TR; Scarmeas N; Yannakoulia M; Kosmidis MH; Guaita A; Rolandi E; Davin A; Gureje O; Trompet S; Gussekloo J; Riedel-Heller S; Pabst A; Röhr S; Shahar S; Singh DKA; Rivan NFM; Boxtel MV; Köhler S; Ganguli M; Chang C-C; Jacobsen E; Haan M; Ding D; Zhao Q; Narazaki K; Chen T; Chen S; Ng TP; Gwee X; Numbers K; Mather KA; Scazufca M; Lobo A; De-la-Cámara C; Lobo E; Sachdev PS; Brodaty H; Hackett ML; Peters SAE; Woodward M
    INTRODUCTION: Sex differences in dementia risk, and risk factor (RF) associations with dementia, remain uncertain across diverse ethno-regional groups. METHODS: A total of 29,850 participants (58% women) from 21 cohorts across six continents were included in an individual participant data meta-analysis. Sex-specific hazard ratios (HRs), and women-to-men ratio of hazard ratios (RHRs) for associations between RFs and all-cause dementia were derived from mixed-effect Cox models. RESULTS: Incident dementia occurred in 2089 (66% women) participants over 4.6 years (median). Women had higher dementia risk (HR, 1.12 [1.02, 1.23]) than men, particularly in low- and lower-middle-income economies. Associations between longer education and former alcohol use with dementia risk (RHR, 1.01 [1.00, 1.03] per year, and 0.55 [0.38, 0.79], respectively) were stronger for men than women; otherwise, there were no discernible sex differences in other RFs. DISCUSSION: Dementia risk was higher in women than men, with possible variations by country-level income settings, but most RFs appear to work similarly in women and men.