MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408626409 · doi:10.1080/01441647.2025.2474556

E-bikes and travel behaviour change: systematic review of experimental studies with meta-analyses

2025· article· en· W4408626409 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransport Reviews · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónGeneralitat de Catalunya
KeywordsTransport engineeringMeta-analysisPublic transportPsychologyEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transitioning from private cars to active modes of transport is key to reducing transport related greenhouse gases emissions and promoting physical activity. Electrically assisted bicycles, often referred to as e-bikes, play a pivotal role in facilitating this shift. However, the environmental and health benefits of e-bikes depend on the modes they substitute, with the highest benefits obtained when private cars are replaced. This systematic review and meta-analysis targets quasi-experimental (i.e. pre–post measures of travel behaviours without control group) and experimental (i.e. pre–post measures of travel behaviours with control groups) studies assessing the impact of acquiring an e-bike on overall travel behaviour changes expressed in both distances and mode share (in % of kilometres travelled). Ten studies, all conducted in Northern Europe, were included. Results from the narrative synthesis and meta-analysis show that: (i) when participants have access to an e-bike, either through a free loan programme or a purchase, they engage in e-cycling; the meta-analysis reveals a significant difference of 5 km travelled daily after the interventions between participants that got access to an e-bike compared to those from control groups with no e-bikes, reflecting a substantial increase of 26% in e-bike mode share; (ii) e-bikes can substitute for all other modes of transport, but car use appears to be the most affected in both the systematic review and meta-analyses difference (2.4 km fewer travelled per day by car between the intervention and control groups at follow-up, reflecting to a 10% decrease in car mode share); (iii) baseline travel behaviours may influence modal shift, with e-bikes substituting for the most prevalent means of transport in baseline. E-bikes have the potential to be a reliable and competitive alternative to cars in a healthier and more sustainable transport system and our study brings new empirical evidence to support this claim.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.342
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.143 · 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