Usability evaluation of detectable warning surfaces in Quebec City (Canada): an exploratory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International standards govern the installation of detectable warning surfaces in urban environments. However, the application of these standards at the local level poses many challenges due to contextual differences. The aim of this qualitative cross-sectional study was to evaluate the usability of detectable warning surfaces installed in Quebec City (Canada) with people with visual impairments. Nineteen participants with various profiles visited two sites where the detectable warning surfaces had been installed. They tested the surfaces as well as adjacent urban facilities following a pedestrian route. They were then interviewed about what they thought of the detectable warning surfaces: their usefulness, messages transmitted, locations chosen, how safe they make users feel, types of environment in which they should be installed, how detectable they are, their advantages and disadvantages, and any desired improvements. Generally, the participants understood the messages transmitted by the warning surfaces and were in favor of their installation. They identified some disadvantages and suggested various improvements. The results of this study provide important information concerning the usability of detectable warning surfaces for partners and stakeholders in Quebec City and also contribute to the international literature in this field.Implications for rehabilitationDetectable warning surfaces increase the readability or use of road infrastructures by people with visual impairments. They make it easier for them to get around independently.This project supports the importance of establishing an effective communication plan, particularly with the aim of clarifying the contexts of implantation and the messages transmitted by the detectable warning surfaces to the people with visual impairments. Training could systematically be offered to them by an orientation and mobility specialist.It is also important to inform and educate the general public and bus drivers about the presence of detectable warning surfaces. Information could be transmitted via some community organizations and the public transit networks.In order to effectively coordinate the implantation process of detectable warning surfaces, communication and consultation between the various stakeholders are essential, including the designers, the municipalities and the concerned government authorities. Detectable warning surfaces increase the readability or use of road infrastructures by people with visual impairments. They make it easier for them to get around independently. This project supports the importance of establishing an effective communication plan, particularly with the aim of clarifying the contexts of implantation and the messages transmitted by the detectable warning surfaces to the people with visual impairments. Training could systematically be offered to them by an orientation and mobility specialist. It is also important to inform and educate the general public and bus drivers about the presence of detectable warning surfaces. Information could be transmitted via some community organizations and the public transit networks. In order to effectively coordinate the implantation process of detectable warning surfaces, communication and consultation between the various stakeholders are essential, including the designers, the municipalities and the concerned government authorities.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".