MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4381685637 · doi:10.1186/s12889-023-16115-7

Road safety, health equity, and the built environment: perspectives of transport and injury prevention professionals in five Canadian municipalities

2023· article· en· W4381685637 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Emily McCullogh, Alison Macpherson, Brent Hagel, Audrey R. Giles, Pamela Fuselli, Ian Pike, Juan Torres, Sarah A. Richmond

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPublic Health OntarioYork UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of OttawaParachuteUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsThematic analysisEquity (law)Public healthOccupational safety and healthPsychological interventionBuilt environmentPublic relationsPoison controlContext (archaeology)Public transportMedicineFocus groupEnvironmental healthBusinessQualitative researchNursingPolitical scienceSociologyTransport engineeringMarketingGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Concerns regarding health equity (HE) and the built environment (BE) are well established in the Canadian urban context. Transport and injury prevention professionals across sectors, such as transportation and public health, are involved in designing and implementing BE interventions that enhance the safety of vulnerable road users (VRUs). Results from a larger study examining barriers and facilitators to BE change are used to illustrate how transport and injury prevention professionals perceive HE concerns in their work in five Canadian municipalities. Broadening our understanding of how HE influences the professional BE change context is crucial when advocating for modifications that enhance the safety of equity-deserving VRUs and groups who experience marginalization. METHODS: Interview and focus group data were gathered from transport and injury prevention professionals working in policy/decision-making, transport, police services, public health, non-profit organizations, schools/school boards, community associations, and private sectors across five Canadian urban municipalities: Vancouver, Calgary, Peel Region, Toronto, and Montréal. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis (TA) to illustrate how equity considerations were perceived and applied in participants' BE change work. RESULTS: The results of this study illustrate transport and injury prevention professionals' awareness of the varying needs of VRUs, as well as the inadequacies of current BEs in the Canadian urban context and consultation processes utilized to guide change. Participants emphasized the importance of equitable community consultation strategies, as well as specific BE changes that would support the health and safety of VRUs. Overall, the results highlight how HE concerns inform transport and injury prevention professionals' BE change work in the Canadian urban context. CONCLUSION: For professionals working in urban Canadian transport and injury prevention sectors HE concerns influenced their perspectives of the BE and BE change. These results illustrate a growing need for HE to guide BE change work and consultation processes. Further, these results contribute to ongoing efforts in the Canadian urban context to ensure that HE is at the forefront of BE policy change and decision-making, while promoting existing strategies to ensure that the BE, and related decision-making processes, are accessible and informed by a HE lens.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0620.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→