MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392139318 · doi:10.1080/17457300.2024.2319620

Transport fare and road traffic crashes in Nigeria: insights from a geographical analysis

2024· article· en· W4392139318 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Adeleke, Ayodeji Iyanda

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransport engineeringFunctional illiteracyGeographyPoison controlRoad trafficOccupational safety and healthEnvironmental healthMedicineEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road traffic crashes (RTCs) are significantly high in Nigeria with serious social and health consequences. While existing studies on RTCs have mainly focused on the effect of socio-economic, environmental, human and mechanical factors to address the high rates, the relationship between road transport fares and RTCs has been glossed over in literature. Thus, this study examines the influence of road transport fares and other covariates on RTCs. Data on RTCs and the predictors between 2017 and 2022 were obtained from the records of the National Bureau of Statistics and the Federal Road Safety Corps. Spatial statistical techniques were used for the data analysis. RTCs vary across the country, and Northern Nigeria is the hot spot. Results from the spatial analysis show that road transport fares, population density, and illiteracy rate are significant predictors of RTCs. The study recommends striking a balance between fare affordability, the quality of service provided, and the implementation of effective transportation strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety PromotionSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207