MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977807774 · doi:10.5339/jemtac.2012.21

A review of large animal vehicle accidents with special focus on Arabian camels

2012· review· en· W1977807774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abdullah Al Shimemeri, Yaseen M. Arabi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of emergency medicine, trauma & acute care · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlifeFencingMiddle EastGeographyCase fatality ratePoachingPoison controlMedicineEnvironmental healthPopulationEcologyArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traffic accidents resulting from the collision of motor vehicles with wildlife occur worldwide. In the United States, Canada, Europe, the Middle East and Australia these collisions usually involve deer, moose, camels and kangaroos. Because these are large animals, the collisions are frequently associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Camel-vehicle collisions in the Middle East—especially Saudi Arabia—have risen to such disturbing proportions that definitive action is necessary for mitigating the trend. Arabian camels, weighing up to 726 kg, form a crucial part of the socio-cultural experience in Saudi Arabia, where about half a million of them are found. Saudi Arabia presents a case of habitat fragmentation, especially in rural communities, where good road systems coexist with domesticated camels. This environment has made camel-vehicle collisions inevitable, and in 2004 alone two hundred such cases were reported. Injuries are directly related to the size of the camel, the speed of the vehicle, passengers' use or avoidance of seat belts, and the protective reflex movements taken to avoid collision. Cervical and dorsal spinal injuries, especially fractured discs, head and chest injuries, are the most commonly reported injuries, and the fatality rate is four times higher than for other causes of traffic accidents. Various mitigation measures are considered in the present work, including measures to improve driver's visibility; the construction of highway fencing; under- and over-passes allowing free movement of camels; the use of reflective warning signs, and awareness programs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of emergency medicine, trauma & acute careSame topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207