ArticleHeliyon2023
Differences in perception of safety in driving environment according to shared PMD user experience through multi-criteria analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A shared personal mobility device (PMD) is a transportation model that rents personal transportation devices, such as bicycles and kickboards, through a sharing platform. The use of shared PMD has increased, but related complaints and traffic accidents are doubling with it every year. This study applied an analytic network process (ANP) methodology for the multi-criteria analysis. A survey including normal citizens was conducted to evaluate the importance of safety regarding shared PMD experience. The evaluation factors differ according to the experience of using the shared PMD device, although 'driving continuity' and 'separation of sidewalks and roadways' were the most important. PMD users gave greater priority to 'removal of the road gap', 'traffic safety signs', 'dedicated parking area' and 'management of obstacles' compared to non-users. On the other hand, for non-PMD users, 'bicycle lane width', 'strengthening enforcement', and 'user safety education' were more important. The results showed that importance differed depending on the participant's experience of using a shared PMD or the lack of it. In the case of users, factors that have a direct effect on driving were prioritised, and in the case of non-users, auxiliary operations and management, such as crackdowns and education, were prioritised.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.