MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109316028 · doi:10.3389/frsc.2020.599635

Built Environmental Correlates of Cycling Accidents Involving Fatalities and Serious Injuries in London, UK

2020· article· en· W3109316028 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Labetski, Antony Chum

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sustainable Cities · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersH2020 European Research Council
KeywordsCyclingQuartilePsychological interventionOddsPoison controlEnvironmental healthInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsOdds ratioRecreationSuicide preventionMedicineTransport engineeringGeographyEngineeringEcologyConfidence intervalLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Approximately 2552 individuals were killed or seriously injured through cycling accidents in the Greater London Area between 2010-2015. The purpose of this study is to investigate a wide range of built environmental correlates of cycling accidents resulting in KSI so that we can identify potential areas for targeted interventions. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis to examine the association between serious cycling injuries (2010-15), using road segment as the unit of analysis, and a wide range of built environmental characteristics. Multilevel models were used to account for potential spatial clustering. Results: Serious cycling injuries were independently associated with higher commercial and residential densities, higher distance to speed camera, higher bus, car, and 2-wheeled (motorcycle and moped) traffic, and higher density of alcohol outlets. Greenspace was associated with decreased odds of injuries up to the 3rd quartile, but roads adjacent to the highest levels of green space (4th quartile) had increased odds of injuries. Findings from our study point to the potential of urban planning interventions to reduce serious cycling injuries (e.g. speed cameras, improving safety near alcohol outlets and in parks and recreational areas, etc.). Further research using quasi-experimental approaches is required to evaluate whether the implementation of interventions leads to injury reductions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Sustainable CitiesSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207