Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39367074›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Auditing road safety achievement using MEREC-ARAS-QBKM model: an empirical study for APEC member economies.

Ziyue Xie, Faan Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ziyue XieBryanston School, Blandford Forum, Dorset, DT11 0PX, UK.
Faan ChenSchool of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA. faanchen@seas.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Progress monitoring and action recalibrations are advocated as promising methods for improving road safety, which significantly relates to economic stability and social development. To achieve this, an auditing framework that can evaluate road safety and aid in policymaking is urgently required. To this end, this study developed a systemic decision model that integrates the method based on the removal effects of criteria (MEREC), additive ratio assessment (ARAS), and quantile-based k-means clustering (QBKM), termed MEREC-ARAS-QBKM, with the aim of auditing road safety achievements and providing corresponding policy suggestions with substantial reliability. In particular, the performance of the traditional k-means clustering model was improved by implanting quantiles to determine the initial clustering, which overcomes the uncertainty of k-means clustering owing to the variety of initial cluster centers. Multiple comparisons of empirical results based on a case study of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) member economies verified the robustness of the proposed model, demonstrating its applicability, practicability, and reliability in handling real-world multi-criteria decision-making problems in the field of road safety. The empirical findings show that road safety developments among the APEC countries are of class differentiation, suggesting an urgent regional benchmarking. Overall, the proposed methodology empowers decision-makers and policymakers in APEC to swiftly formulate effective action plans, countermeasures, and investment schemes, ultimately contributing to the enhancement of road safety performance and socio-economic benefit across APEC members.

Indexed as

Asia-Pacific Economic CooperationMachine learningPolicy makingRoad safety performanceSocio-economic development

Identifiers

PMID39367074
PMCPMC11452539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.