MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079128485 · doi:10.1159/000258052

Pedestrian Fatalities and Injuries Involving Irish Older People

2009· article· en· W2079128485 on OpenAlexaff
Alan J. Martin, Elizabeth Hand, F. Trace, Desmond O’Neill

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianDaylightInjury preventionSuicide preventionPoison controlIrishOccupational safety and healthOlder peopleMedicineGerontologyDemographyHuman factors and ergonomicsGeographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It has been established internationally that road traffic accidents (RTAs) involving older drivers follow clearly different patterns of timing, location and outcomes from those of younger age groups. Older pedestrians are also a vulnerable group and fewer analyses have been undertaken of the phenomenology of their injuries and fatalities. We studied the pattern of pedestrian RTAs in Ireland over a five-year period with the aim of identifying differences between older pedestrians (aged 65 or older) and younger adults. METHODS: We examined the datasets of the Irish National Road Authority (now the Road Safety Authority) from 1998-2002. We analysed patterns of crashes involving older pedestrians (aged 65) and compared them with younger adults (aged 18-64). RESULTS: Older people represented 36% (n = 134) of pedestrian fatalities and 23% of serious injuries while they only account for 19% of total RTAs. Mortality in RTA is more than doubled for older pedestrians compared to younger adults (RR 2.30). Most accidents involving older pedestrians happen in daylight with good visibility (56%) and in good weather conditions (77%). CONCLUSIONS: Older pedestrians are particularly vulnerable in RTAs. These occur more frequently during daylight hours and in good weather conditions. This may point to a need for prevention strategies that are targeted at the traffic environment and other road users rather than at older people.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations29
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontologySame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207