Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Crowdsourced data for bicycling research and practice

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references60

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study

          Objective To estimate the risks and benefits to health of travel by bicycle, using a bicycle sharing scheme, compared with travel by car in an urban environment. Design Health impact assessment study. Setting Public bicycle sharing initiative, Bicing, in Barcelona, Spain. Participants 181 982 Bicing subscribers. Main outcomes measures The primary outcome measure was all cause mortality for the three domains of physical activity, air pollution (exposure to particulate matter <2.5 µm), and road traffic incidents. The secondary outcome was change in levels of carbon dioxide emissions. Results Compared with car users the estimated annual change in mortality of the Barcelona residents using Bicing (n=181 982) was 0.03 deaths from road traffic incidents and 0.13 deaths from air pollution. As a result of physical activity, 12.46 deaths were avoided (benefit:risk ratio 77). The annual number of deaths avoided was 12.28. As a result of journeys by Bicing, annual carbon dioxide emissions were reduced by an estimated 9 062 344 kg. Conclusions Public bicycle sharing initiatives such as Bicing in Barcelona have greater benefits than risks to health and reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The world’s user-generated road map is more than 80% complete

            OpenStreetMap, a crowdsourced geographic database, provides the only global-level, openly licensed source of geospatial road data, and the only national-level source in many countries. However, researchers, policy makers, and citizens who want to make use of OpenStreetMap (OSM) have little information about whether it can be relied upon in a particular geographic setting. In this paper, we use two complementary, independent methods to assess the completeness of OSM road data in each country in the world. First, we undertake a visual assessment of OSM data against satellite imagery, which provides the input for estimates based on a multilevel regression and poststratification model. Second, we fit sigmoid curves to the cumulative length of contributions, and use them to estimate the saturation level for each country. Both techniques may have more general use for assessing the development and saturation of crowd-sourced data. Our results show that in many places, researchers and policymakers can rely on the completeness of OSM, or will soon be able to do so. We find (i) that globally, OSM is ∼83% complete, and more than 40% of countries—including several in the developing world—have a fully mapped street network; (ii) that well-governed countries with good Internet access tend to be more complete, and that completeness has a U-shaped relationship with population density—both sparsely populated areas and dense cities are the best mapped; and (iii) that existing global datasets used by the World Bank undercount roads by more than 30%.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Citizen Science Terminology Matters: Exploring Key Terms

              Author Summary: Much can be at stake depending on the choice of words used to describe citizen science, because terminology impacts how knowledge is developed. Citizen science is a quickly evolving field that is mobilizing people’s involvement in information development, social action and justice, and large-scale information gathering. Currently, a wide variety of terms and expressions are being used to refer to the concept of ‘citizen science’ and its practitioners. Here, we explore these terms to help provide guidance for the future growth of this field. We do this by reviewing the theoretical, historical, geopolitical, and disciplinary context of citizen science terminology; discussing what citizen science is and reviewing related terms; and providing a collection of potential terms and definitions for ‘citizen science’ and people participating in citizen science projects. This collection of terms was generated primarily from the broad knowledge base and on-the-ground experience of the authors, by recognizing the potential issues associated with various terms. While our examples may not be systematic or exhaustive, they are intended to be suggestive and invitational of future consideration. In our collective experience with citizen science projects, no single term is appropriate for all contexts. In a given citizen science project, we suggest that terms should be chosen carefully and their usage explained; direct communication with participants about how terminology affects them and what they would prefer to be called also should occur. We further recommend that a more systematic study of terminology trends in citizen science be conducted.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Transport Reviews
                Transport Reviews
                Informa UK Limited
                0144-1647
                1464-5327
                January 02 2021
                August 15 2020
                January 02 2021
                : 41
                : 1
                : 97-114
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
                [2 ]Department of Geography, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
                [3 ]School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
                [4 ]Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
                Article
                10.1080/01441647.2020.1806943
                f382d794-5e86-491f-aa2e-e33189f15e5c
                © 2021

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article