ArticleScientific reports2025
The nonlinear relationship between built environment and cycling propensity for different travel purposes - based on extreme gradient boosting decision tree.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bicycles, as a flexible, convenient, and low-carbon mode of transportation, possess significant advantages in short-distance travel. Linear and generalized linear models have been widely employed for modeling in previous studies, while the nonlinear relationship between the built environment and cycling behavior has received scant attention. Consequently, this paper delves into the significance of individual and family socio-economic attributes, travel characteristics, and built environment attributes regarding bicycle choice behavior, as well as the nonlinear relationship and threshold effect between the principal variable and the propensity for bicycle choice for two distinct travel purposes, based on the data from the 2018 Daily Trip Survey in Xianyang, China. The results reveal that: (1) The prediction accuracies of the cycling choice models for compulsory and discretionary trips were 89% and 80%, respectively. (2) The built environment exerts a more substantial impact on the two travel purposes, with the impact of compulsory trips being notably greater than that of discretionary trips. The relative importance of variables encompasses the proportion of non-vehicle isolation belts, the non-motor lane parking ratio, population density, distance from the center, and POI diversity, among others. (3) In the two travel activities, the relationships between the main variables and threshold effects vary. These findings offer policy implications for implementing differential interventions to promote bicycle usage in cities.
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.