MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413754804 · doi:10.1080/23748834.2025.2544099

Bridging the gap: a bibliometric examination of the interdependency between pedestrian activity and built environment

2025· article· en· W4413754804 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCities & Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)PedestrianInterdependenceComputer scienceEngineeringSociologyTransport engineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This bibliometric study comprehensively analyses the research landscape at the intersection of pedestrians and the built environment from 1975 to 2024, from the first study in the field till now. Several studies have published in recent years; however, lack a comprehensive approach to find out the themes and areas studied, and the analysis of the research gap remains unidentified (Revision 6.3). To address this, the extensive Scopus database was used, and 1126 research papers were selected based on relevance to map publication trends, identify dominant themes, pinpoint research gaps, and chart future research directions. The analysis reveals that research in this field has grown exponentially since 2007-08, with the United States leading in research output, followed by Canada, China, Australia, South Korea, and the United Kingdom. Global North highlights the lack of research in the region, but China and India are emerging as research hubs. Studies show the evolution of themes from thermal comfort to safety and security. It also addresses socio-demographic, sustainability, and universal inclusivity factors for growing urban spaces. This study helps stakeholders, such as industry experts, policymakers, urban planners, and researchers, by providing important evidence-based insights and a holistic overview of the field.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.289 · 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