MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073772312 · doi:10.1080/15389588.2012.762510

Fifteen-Passenger Vans and Other Transportation Options: A Comparison of Driver, Vehicle, and Crash Characteristics

2013· article· en· W2073772312 on OpenAlexafffund
Tom De Potter, Sacha Dubois, Kathy Haras, Michel Bédard

Bibliographic record

VenueTraffic Injury Prevention · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversitySt. Joseph's Care GroupLakehead University
FundersAUTO21 Network of Centres of ExcellenceNetworks of Centres of Excellence of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsOntario Neurotrauma Foundation
KeywordsRollover (web design)CrashOddsOccupancyPoison controlLogistic regressionTransport engineeringInjury preventionVehicle miles of travelOccupational safety and healthOdds ratioEngineeringDemographyStatisticsMedicineEnvironmental healthComputer scienceMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Fifteen-passenger vans (15-PVs) are a convenient and economical way to transport small groups of people and many educational, community, and health organizations utilize them. Given recent tragic crashes involving 15-PVs, many organizations are reconsidering their use. The goal of this study was to examine driver, vehicle, and crash characteristics of fatal 15-PV collisions over the past 2 decades in comparison to 3 other common vehicle classes. METHODS: We used data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (years 1991-2008). Driver, vehicle, and crash characteristics were compared by vehicle classes (15-PV, cars, minivans, and intercity buses) using proportions along with odds ratios (using cars as the reference category) for dichotomous variables and means and mean differences for continuous variables. Logistic regression and analysis of variance were used to statistically compare odds and means, respectively. The odds and absolute risk of a first, subsequent, and either rollover by vehicle type and occupancy rate were also examined. Odds and absolute risk of a rollover event by occupancy rate were calculated. RESULTS: Compared to car drivers, van drivers typically had a better past 3-year driving record. Van drivers performed significantly fewer actions suggesting aggressive driving (e.g., speeding). However, the proportion of van drivers who were deemed to have followed improperly or to have overcorrected was greater. A vehicle rollover was cited almost twice as frequently in van crashes compared to other passenger vehicles. Of the 4 vehicle types studied, all were more likely to rollover as their occupancy rates increased. Fully loaded 15-PVs had almost 13 times the odds of rollover compared to fully loaded cars. Minivans when full (7 occupants), often seen as the replacement for 15-PVs, were found to have over 3.5 times the odds of rollover of fully loaded cars. CONCLUSIONS: Drivers need to be aware that as occupancy rates of the vehicles they drive rise so does the risk of rollover and fatalities, especially among minivans and 15-PVs. Organizations transporting groups need to balance cost and safety management by selecting vehicle types and drivers with acute awareness of the risks involved.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraffic Injury PreventionSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207