MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134965674 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1422009112

Results of a large-scale randomized behavior change intervention on road safety in Kenya

2015· article· en· W2134965674 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James Habyarimana, William Jack

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeorgetown UniversityUNICEFUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsNudge theoryIntervention (counseling)Road trafficQuarter (Canadian coin)KenyaScale (ratio)Test (biology)Null hypothesisMedicineTransport engineeringSocioeconomicsPsychologyGeographyEconomicsEngineeringSocial psychologyEconometricsNursingPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road accidents kill 1.3 million people each year, most in the developing world. We test the efficacy of evocative messages, delivered on stickers placed inside Kenyan matatus, or minibuses, in reducing road accidents. We randomize the intervention, which nudges passengers to complain to their drivers directly, across 12,000 vehicles and find that on average it reduces insurance claims rates of matatus by between one-quarter and one-third and is associated with 140 fewer road accidents per year than predicted. Messages promoting collective action are especially effective, and evocative images are an important motivator. Average maximum speeds and average moving speeds are 1-2 km/h lower in vehicles assigned to treatment. We cannot reject the null hypothesis of no placebo effect. We were unable to discern any impact of a complementary radio campaign on insurance claims. Finally, the sticker intervention is inexpensive: we estimate the cost-effectiveness of the most impactful stickers to be between $10 and $45 per disability-adjusted life-year saved.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207