Spatial distribution of pedestrian-motor vehicle collisions before and after pedestrian countdown signal installation in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pedestrian countdown signals (PCS) have been installed in many cities over the last 15 years. Few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of PCS on pedestrian motor vehicle collisions (PMVC). This exploratory study compared the spatial patterns of collisions pre and post PCS installation at PCS intersections and intersections or roadways without PCS in Toronto, and examined differences by age. METHODS: PCS were installed at the majority of Toronto intersections from 2007 to 2009. Spatial patterns were compared between 4 years of police-reported PMVC prior to PCS installation to 4 years post installation at 1864 intersections. The spatial distribution of PMVC was estimated using kernel density estimates and simple point patterns examined changes in spatial patterns overall and stratified by age. Areas of higher or lower point density pre to post installation were identified. RESULTS: There were 14 911 PMVC included in the analysis. There was an overall reduction in PMVC post PCS installation at both PCS locations and non-PCS locations, with a greater reduction at non-PCS locations (22% vs 1%). There was an increase in PMVC involving adults (5%) and older adults (9%) at PCS locations after installation, with increased adult PMVC concentrated downtown, and older adult increases occurring throughout the city following no spatial pattern. There was a reduction in children's PMVC at both PCS and non-PCS locations, with greater reductions at non-PCS locations (35% vs 48%). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the effects of PCS on PMVC may vary by age and location, illustrating the usefulness of exploratory spatial data analysis approaches in road safety. The age and location effects need to be understood in order to consistently improve pedestrian mobility and safety using PCS.
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 | 0.000 | 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".