MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399913326 · doi:10.1016/j.trip.2024.101143

Influence of public transport training for people with disabilities: Protocol for a systematic review

2024· review· en· W4399913326 on OpenAlexaff
Claudel R Mwaka, Krista L. Best, Martine Gagnon, François Routhier

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Training (meteorology)PsychologyPublic transportApplied psychologyMedical educationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineAlternative medicineEngineeringTransport engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Travel training is a potential solution enable PWD to improve knowledge, psychosocial skills and public transportation use. • Traveling independently using a public transit is an expression of autonomy and can facilitate social interactions. • It is therefore up to transport operators to implement travel training programs based on scientific evidence to better meet travel needs of PWD. • Our systematic review will identify best practices in travel training and provide information on how to address the travel training needs of PWD. Travel training programs that include components of the real environment, simulation, application, and virtual reality may facilitate increased use of fixed-route public transport among people with disabilities (PWD). Existing evidence on travel training programs focused on outcomes in youth with disabilities. However, little is known about how such programs may influence knowledge and psychosocial skills for public transport use among adult with disabilities and older adults. This systematic review aims to examine the influence of travel training on knowledge, psychosocial skills (e.g., transportation-related self-efficacy and self-determination), and public transport use among adult with disabilities and older adults. This protocol of systematic review will be guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015. The literature search will include empirical studies published in French and English from 1990 to 2023 in the following database: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Transport Database via Ovid platform, and Embase and the Web of science. An update will be made to ensure that all relevant material is retrieved. All literature search results will be imported in Covidence software for screening and data extraction. Given that we expect to have studies with a variety of data collection methods and tools, the meta-analysis will not be used. The results of this review will be reported according to PRISMA 2020. A review of the influence of travel training on various outcomes will facilitate transport operators to develop and implement the best travel training interventions to better meet public transit needs of PWD.

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)0.069
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0690.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.020
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.009

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Interdisciplinary PerspectivesSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207