Statistical estimation of fatal and serious injuries saved by iRAP protocols in 74 countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Road traffic crashes cause 1.19 million deaths and millions more injuries annually. The persistently high burden has drawn attention from national and international stakeholders worldwide. Unsafe road infrastructure is one of the major risk factors for traffic safety, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Aiming to eliminate high-risk roads in all countries, the International Road Assessment Programme (iRAP) developed a robust and evidence-based approach to support country transportation agencies. RESULTS: Thus far, the iRAP protocols have been used to collect 1.8 million kilometers of Crash Risk Mapping and 1.5 million kilometers of Star Rating and FSI estimations in 128 countries. Deploying an observational before-and-after (or pre-post) study design, this report estimated the fatal and series injuries (FSI) saved through use of the iRAP protocols. The study is based on 441,753 kilometers of assessed roads from 1,039 projects in 74 countries. Our results show that the implementation of iRAP's proposed countermeasures saves about 159,936 FSI annually. Throughout the lifetime of the implemented countermeasures, a total of 3.2 million FSI could be saved. CONCLUSION: While quantifying the success of the iRAP protocols, our results suggest an opportunity to save many millions more lives on the roads through expanding iRAP implementation to more regions and countries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".