ArticlePloS one2025
A family of accessibility measures derived from spatial interaction principles.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transportation planning has long prioritized the efficiency of movement. However, the concept of accessibility represents a more comprehensive evolution, shifting focus from movement (i.e., trips) to the potential to spatially interact with desired destinations. Despite growing recognition of accessibility-based planning approaches, the concept remains fragmented, with inconsistent definitions and unclear interpretations. To this end, this paper makes a methodological contribution by specifying a family of accessibility measures that are grounded in the shared 'gravity-based' theoretical roots of spatial interaction models, particularly their balancing factors. From this foundation, we outline four members of the family: the 'unconstrained' measure (i.e., Hansen-type accessibility), the 'total-constrained' measure (i.e., a constrained version of the Hansen-type accessibility), the 'singly-constrained' measure (i.e., related to the popular two-step floating catchment approach - 2SFCA), and the 'doubly-constrained' measure representing realized access (i.e., equal to the doubly-constrained spatial interaction model). These measures can be interpreted as either the number of accessible opportunities or accessible population (i.e., market potential). A toy example illustrates how they produce interpretable unit-based values, offering a clearer and more coherent basis for accessibility analysis.
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.