MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117488978 · doi:10.32866/001c.154704

A Gendered Analysis of the Mobility of Care Done by Bike in Victoria, Canada

2025· article· en· W7117488978 on OpenAlex
Naeva Scott Bouris, Meghan Winters

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFindings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsCyclingQuarter (Canadian coin)Child careSocial mobility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women do a majority of mobility of care; in Canada they also tend to cycle less. We look at mobility of care by bike, specifically the gendered dimensions of child transportation and the equipment used to facilitate it. We observed 4026 people cycling in Victoria, Canada, 6.1% of whom were carrying children. The gender split was ~40:60 women: men, nearly identical for those with and without children. Electric cycle use was 2.5 times higher for those carrying children, and two-thirds were using cargo bikes. Findings show that mobility of care by bike is similar to overall bike use across genders and that cycling technologies appear important in uptake.

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)0.000
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.255 · 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