Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40549773›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Does noise pollution influence modal choices? A random forest application.

Alessia Calafiore, Ki Tong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Alessia CalafioreEdinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5953-2891
Ki TongEdinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This work investigates the relationship between noise pollution and modal choices exploring and comparing two different urban contexts: Greater London and Brisbane. To achieve this, data on commuting flows by mode of transport and estimated noise pollution have been obtained and combined with measures to characterise the built environment which demonstrated to have an influence on modal choices. Random forest models have shown very good performances in solving classification problems to predict transport modes and allow the exploration of non-linear relationships between the predicted classes and explanatory variables. Two random forest models have been tuned, trained and tested to investigate the association between modal choices and contextual variables, including noise pollution, in Greater London and Brisbane. Results have shown that noise levels play a role in predicting modal choices in Greater London, while the characteristics of the built environment are more relevant when predicting modal choices in Brisbane. Furthermore, we find that walking and cycling, despite being both active travel modes, are influenced by very different factors, with cycling displaying patterns more similar to those characterising driving. Evidence showing the varying relationships between walking and cycling with contextual variables, e.g. noise levels, building and street density, presence of amenities can inform more targeted policies to encourage active travel.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorNoiseNoise, TransportationTransportationBicyclingBuilt EnvironmentHumansLondonQueenslandRandom ForestWalking

Identifiers

PMID40549773
PMCPMC12184936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.