ArticleScientific reports2025
Transport equity assessment based on accessibility disparities in terms of multi-job opportunities across Beijing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Uncovering how transport access reduces deprivation: When colocation misleads.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evaluating equal access to opportunities across social groups is an important aspect of transport equity research, but existing schemes rarely focus on accessibility to specific opportunities for specific groups. This study distinguishes between different education groups and job sectors which come from Nation Census Statistics and National Economic Census, respectively, with the aim of evaluating transport equity in Beijing by examining the disparity between high- and low-education groups in accessing job opportunities of specific sectors with different education requirements. Using the bivariate local spatial autocorrelation model to reveal the relationship between provision of accessibility and the population quantity of different groups in regions based on different transport modes. Regions with low accessibility level but high groups numbers may rise to inequity of transport. It was found that high-education groups had more equal accessibility to high-education job opportunities than low-education groups had in their access to low-education jobs. In terms of diversity of opportunity, the differences in job accessibility between low- and high-education groups tended to diminish, and equity in accessibility was also improved. Disadvantaged areas with high population demands for jobs exhibited lower accessibility levels by public transport compared to car travel, and more of the low-education groups were located in disadvantaged areas and obtained fewer opportunities, particularly for the groups without Hukou status. Diversity of opportunity helped to reduce the difference between car travel and public transport in disadvantaged areas, and also decreased the inequities in accessibility among different educational groups. To improve transport equity, it is recommended to prioritize public transport in fringe areas and disadvantaged areas, and the development of multi-job sectors in these areas should be undertaken to cater to the demands of different education groups.
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.