MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W34703841 · doi:10.1016/j.omtm.2021.05.018

A Model of Bus Drivers’ Diseases: Risk Factors and Bus Accidents

2015· article· en· W34703841 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gholamhosein Sadri

Bibliographic record

VenueIranian journal of medical sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSigrid Juséliuksen Säätiö
KeywordsMedicineSAFEREnvironmental healthOccupational safety and healthInjury preventionMigrainePoison controlMedical emergencyTransport engineeringComputer securityEngineeringPsychiatryComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bus accident is a major health problem for bus drivers.  To identify the risk factors involved in bus accidents and to design a model showing the relation between the risk factors and bus driver’s health status, 219 bus drivers who worked for travel agencies in two areas of west and central Iran were enrolled into this study.  We used a questionnaire to gather information regarding both the bus drivers’ health status and bus accident. The most prevalent health problems among bus drivers were musculoskeletal disorders, ulcer, hyperacidity, obesity, hypertension and diabetes.  There was a significant (p<0.05) correlation between the chance of bus accidents and occurrence of low back pain, leg pain, neck pain, hypertension and migraine.  Based on the results of this study we suggest a model that can be used to design a prevention plan in making bus transportation safer.  In light of this study, more comprehensive studies can be planned for the safety of traveling by bus, in Iran.  Bus driver’s health status is a determinant factor in the incidence of accidents.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIranian journal of medical sciencesSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207