ArticleHeliyon2023
Development of a hazard prediction test for Chinese cyclists and its association with crash involvement.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Hazard Types on Hazard Perception and Decision-Making Among Adolescent Bicyclists: Results of a Hazard Prediction Task.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Driver Screening Method Based on Perception Ability Test of Dangerous Omen.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Assessing hazard prediction and risk calibration skills in experienced and novice e-scooter riders.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Hazard perception is the ability to sense the road environment and predict and respond to the upcoming dangerous events, and this factor is closely related to cyclists' crash involvement. However, due to a lack of valid instruments, studies concerning the hazard predictions and crashes of cyclists in China remain limited. This study attempted to develop a hazard prediction test for cyclists. Method: The experiment presented 44 video clips filmed from cyclists' perspectives to 61 children aged 13-16 years and 119 adults aged 18-30 years. After the video clip displayed a black screen, participants were asked to answer the following questions: "What is the hazard?" (question 1), "Where is the hazard?" (question 2), and "What happens next?" (question 3). The differences in test scores between cyclists with high and low levels of experience, cyclists of different ages, and crash-involved and noncrash-involved cyclists were compared to examine the validity of the test. Results: The final test contained 21 video clips and the internal consistency reliabilities of the three questions were satisfactory. Experienced cyclists are better able to identify and predict hazards than are cyclists with less experience, and adult cyclists have better hazard prediction abilities than child cyclists. More importantly, crash-involved cyclists receiving lower scores with respect to their ability to identify and predict hazards than noncrash-involved cyclists, thus indicating that the discriminant validity of the test was acceptable. Practical applications: This newly-developed test exhibits acceptable reliability and validity and can be used as an effective tool to measure the hazard prediction abilities of cyclists with different ages and levels of experience in China. The natural driving videos and test in the study may hold promise for future practical applications, and the implications for road safety are discussed.
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.