The “Unintended Pedestrian” on Expressways
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the epidemiology of pedestrian deaths in Dallas County, Texas, and to compare factors associated with pedestrian deaths on expressways versus those that occurred on other roadways. METHODS: We studied all pedestrian deaths among persons 15 years of age or older in Dallas County, Texas, from 1997 to 2004 by linking data from Medical Examiner's office, the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, and local police records. Univariate and multivariate analysis compared various factors associated with death on an expressway. RESULTS: Among 437 pedestrian deaths who were 15 years of age or older, 197 (45%) occurred on expressways; the proportion that occurred on expressways was highest among 15- to 29-year-olds (65%) and was lower with advancing age group (p < 0.01, chi square for trend). At least 36% of these expressway-related pedestrian deaths were known to have been "unintended pedestrians," who had exited a vehicle after being on the roadway, compared with 11% of pedestrian deaths on surface streets (OR 4.6, 95% CI, 2.7-8.1), and this was also highest among younger age groups. Pedestrian deaths on an expressway, compared with deaths on surface streets, remained strongly associated with having been an "unintended pedestrian" (OR 6.2, 95% CI, 3.1-14.0), after controlling for several other variables, including age, sex, race, nighttime of crash, and alcohol involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Expressways are the predominant site of fatal pedestrian crashes among young adults in this urban area. Since many of these deaths were "unintended pedestrians," procedures for management of occupants of disabled vehicles on expressways could have a large impact on pedestrian deaths in young adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".