ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Development of a Semi-Automated Tool Based on Computer Vision Methods for Safety Assessment of Micromobility Users.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The operational behavior of micromobility users is a key indicator of the safety performance and design quality of cycling infrastructure; yet, existing video-based methods either require intensive manual processing or locate users coarsely through the centroid of the bounding box. This study presents and validates a semi-automated computer-vision tool that extracts the lateral position and instantaneous speed of micromobility users from bird's-eye-view video recordings acquired with a single camera. The tool, implemented in Python 3.10.11, integrates bike lane segmentation, background-subtraction-based detection, multi-object tracking, and a heatmap-based contour extraction that places the measurement point at the wheel-pavement contact, providing a physically meaningful reference at predefined control sections. Validation was conducted in controlled tangent and curved sections, against physical distance references and previously verified e-scooter speed readings. In the tangent section, lateral position estimates showed a negligible bias, with a mean error below 1 cm and 99% of observations within ±5.0 cm, while over 70% of speed estimates were within ±2.0 km/h tolerance. In the curved section, the tool slightly underestimated lateral position and overestimated speed, with errors remaining within the practical tolerances. These results support the use of the tool for operational and safety studies of micromobility infrastructure under controlled conditions, reducing processing time without requiring trained detection models.
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.