MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128607255 · doi:10.26180/3859839.v1

GIS-based spatial analysis of child pedestrian accidents near primary schools in Montréal, Canada

2016· article· W7128607255 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonash University · 2016
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianNeighbourhood (mathematics)Regression analysisPoison controlGeographic information systemDimension (graph theory)Human factors and ergonomicsRelevance (law)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Montréal, Canada, accidents affecting child pedestrians (5 to 14 years old) remained almost constant from 1994 to 1999 despite the great amount of prevention measures. Moreover, the elementary public school environment has been barely taken into account by past and present research on factors affecting the risk of accident even though children attend school most weekdays. We argue here, therefore, that the integration of the local environment into the spatial analysis of child pedestrian accidents could help to reduce them. Accordingly, we have integrated socio-economic and environmental data into a geographic information system in order to perform a geographically weighted regression and results demonstrate that the average network distance separating accident and closest school is less than 500 meters, thereby confirming a relationship of proximity between these two locations. Results also demonstrate the relevance of adding a spatial dimension to the regression model by suggesting that prevention initiatives should take into account the particular nature of each neighbourhood so that more relevant risk factors can be targeted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.148
Teacher spread0.145 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonash UniversitySame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207