Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41766022›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

A multimodal data framework for motorcyclist injury severity on rural undivided roads.

Swastika Barua, Anandi K Dutta, Subasish Das

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Swastika BaruaDepartment of Civil Engineering, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, 78666, USA. swastika.barua.purna@gmail.com.
Anandi K DuttaDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, 78666, USA.
Subasish DasDepartment of Civil Engineering, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, 78666, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motorcycle crashes on rural undivided roads remain a significant safety concern due to the high incidence of severe injuries and fatalities. This study analyzes a comprehensive dataset of 12,753 motorcycle crashes from rural undivided roads in Texas. Employing a multi-method approach, the research first applies Cluster Correspondence Analysis (CCA) to identify underlying patterns in crash characteristics, followed by the estimation of cluster-based Random Parameter Logit Models. Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling of crash narratives further supplements the analysis by uncovering key crash scenarios and thematic trends. The findings indicate that severe and fatal motorcycle injuries on rural undivided roads are primarily driven by high-speed loss-of-control events, particularly run-off-road and overturn crashes occurring on straight and curved segments. Crashes at intersections represent a severity mechanism, where inadequate lighting and turning or yielding conflicts combine to increase injury risk. Additionally, nighttime crashes on rural segments, especially those involving fixed objects or animals, emerge as a distinct high-risk scenario, reflecting the compounded effects of limited visibility, high operating speeds, and reduced reaction time on motorcyclist injury severity. The findings inform a suite of policy interventions grounded in the Safe System Approach (SSA), recommending context-sensitive speed management, rural infrastructure upgrades, helmet use promotion, and improved emergency and wildlife response as essential strategies.

Indexed as

Cluster correspondence analysisMotorcycle crash severityRPLRural undivided roadsSHAPTopic modeling

Identifiers

PMID41766022
PMCPMC13056946

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.