Walkable but unsafe? a systematic review of built environment correlates of walking and child pedestrian injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background A well-established body of walkability literature examines the correlates of walking in children; however, correlates of child pedestrian injury are less understood. Walkability does not necessarily imply safety. Built environment conditions for safe walking must be defined so that increased walking does not lead to increased pedestrian injury. Objective To identify modifiable features of the built environment related to both walking and pedestrian injury in children. Methods A systematic literature review across 10 electronic databases from 1980-Feb, 2012 sought statistically significant associations between built environment factors and either walking or safety in urban children 4–12, in Western countries. Environmental features were grouped into those that increased or decreased walking and improved or worsened safety. Results Thirty-seven pedestrian injury and 50 walking papers met the inclusion criteria. Traffic lights and calming devices and the presence of recreational areas and playgrounds were related to more and safer walking. Eight features were related to more walking and less safe pedestrian outcomes. The majority of built environment features had inconsistent associations with either walking or injury, or had not been tested for either one of the outcomes. Well designed controlled experimental studies are lacking examining the built environment and walking or injury in children. Significance These results reflect current knowledge and can be used to inform future injury prevention evaluations relate to safe walking promotion in children. Walkability features must be assessed against safety criteria in order to optimise the pedestrian environment for children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".