Bicycling Injuries in Children: The Role of the Built Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Bicycling has many health benefits for children but can result in injuries, some severe. Additionally, children’s perceptions of injury risk decrease participation. The built environment is associated with the risk of bicycling injury in adults, yet less is known about risks for children who have different bicycling behaviours and locations than adults. This dissertation improves understanding of child bicyclist injury risk factors and perceptions in Canada, with an emphasis on the role of the built environment. Methods: We recruited 333 injured child bicyclists (ages 5-17) who presented to pediatric emergency departments in Vancouver, Calgary, and Toronto from May 2018 - October 2021. Using data from participant interviews and in-person site audits of injury/control locations from the injured child’s route, Chapter 3 used a case-crossover study design to examine associations between built environment characteristics and child bicyclist injuries. Chapter 4 used data from the case-crossover study to explore injury circumstances and examine risk factors associated with severe child bicyclist injuries. In 2021, 40 participants also completed a qualitative interview to explore injured child bicyclists’ perceptions of risk factors and safety (Chapter 5). Results: The results in Chapter 3 provided evidence that unpaved off road locations, presence of debris, poor surface quality, surface grade, and construction were risk factors for child bicyclist injuries. In Chapter 4, motor vehicle involvement and intersections were associated with higher odds of severe injury in child bicyclists. In Chapter 5, child bicyclists shared that some of the factors that contribute to perceptions of safety included sharing spaces with motor vehicles, road design, debris, surface quality, and surface grade. Conclusions: This study adds to evidence suggesting built environment supports are important for increasing bicycling safety for Canadian children. There is a critical need to provide child bicyclists with safe spaces where they are physically separated from motor vehicles and to ensure that routes used by child bicyclists are properly maintained.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".