Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Levels of Evidence in Transport Research

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advanced Solutions for Mobility in Urban Areas (TSTP 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 907))

  • 31 Accesses

Abstract

This article is an attempt to analyze the issue of the level of scientific evidence presented in broadly understood transport research. Various classifications of levels of evidence (LOE) have been formalized in the scientific literature and are reviewed in this article. They help assess the importance (rank) and quality of publicly presented scientific studies. On their basis, the recipient of scientific content forms an opinion on its usefulness and credibility. Not all LOEs are used in transportation studies. Those that are used are used with different frequencies. In this article, the authors analyze the problem of why more and less popular methods can be observed in scientific research in transport. The article tries to explain why transport research is currently being conducted in this way and, above all, whether it is possible to change the observed state of affairs in this matter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chande, P.K., Tokekar, S.V.: Expert-based maintenance: a study of its effectiveness. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 46(1), 53–58 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Clemen, R.T., Winkler, R.L.: Combining probability distributions from experts in risk analysis. Risk Anal. 19(2), 187–203 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cooke, R.M.: Excalibur – Windows Version of Excalibur: Software for Performance Based Combination of Expert Judgments. Department of Mathematics, Delft Uni (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Goossens, L.H.J., Harper, F.T., Kraan, B.C.P., Metivier, H.: Expert judgment for a probabilistic accident consequence uncertainty analysis. Radiat. Protect. Dosimet. 90(3), 295–303 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hatfield, A.J., Hipel, K.W.: Risk and systems theory. Risk Anal. 22(6), 1043–1057 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kline, A., Renn, O.: A new approach to risk evaluation and management: risk based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies. Risk Anal. 22(6), 1071–1094 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kraan, B.C.P., Cooke, R.M.: Processing expert judgment in accident consequence modeling. Appear. Radiat. Protect. Dosimet. (Exp. Judgm. Accident Conseq. Uncertain. Anal. Spec. Issu.) 90(3), 311–315 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Myung, I.J., Ramamoorti, S., Bailey, A.D., Jr.: Maximum entropy aggregation of expert predictions. Manage. Sci. 42(10), 1420–1436 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Skjong, R., Eknes, M.L.: Societal risk and societal benefits. Risk Decis. Policy 7, 57–67 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. West, M.:, Modeling Expert Opinion. Bayesian Statistics 3, pp. 493–508. Oxford University Press (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Greenhalgh, T.: How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine, 5th edn. Wiley (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Łamża, Ł.: Śwaty Równoległe, Czarna Owca. Wołowiec (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fleischmann, M., Pons, S.: Electrochemically Induced Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium. J. Electroanal. Chem. 261, 301 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rebolj, A.B.: The case study as a type of qualitative research. J. Contemp. Educ. Stud. 28–43 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mills, A.J., Durepos, G., Wiebe, E. (eds.): Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. SAGE Publications, Inc. (2010). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412957397

  16. Setia, M.: Methodology series mod. 3: Crosssectional studies. Indian J. Dermatol. 61, 261–264 (2016). https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.182410. http://www.med.mcgill.ca/epidemiology/hanley/c609/material/CaseControlStudiesBreslow2007.pdf

  17. Morrow, B.: An overview of cohort study designs and their advantages and disadvantages. Int. J. Therapy Rehabili. 17, 458–463 (2010). https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2010.17.10.78810

  18. Stolberg, H., Norman, G., Trop, I.: Randomized controlled trials. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 183, 1539–1544 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.183.6.01831539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nunn, J., Chang, S.: What are systematic reviews?. Wiki J. Med. 7, 5 (2020). https://doi.org/10.15347/WJM/2020.005

  20. Shelby, L., Vaske, J.: Understanding meta-analysis: a review of the methodological literature. Leisure Sci. 30, 96–110 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400701881366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kroger, J.:. The Applicability and Limitations of Expert System Shells 38 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  22. https://www.ilearnlot.com/expert-system-advantages-disadvantages/34332/

  23. https://www.oecd.org/corruption/anti-corruptionethicscompliancehandbook.pdf

  24. Macik, R.: Ankiety internetowe w percepcji osób korzystających i niekorzystających z nich w pracy zawodowej [Web Surveys (Cawi) Perception by Marketing Professionals Classified as Cawi Users and Non-Users]. Studia Ekonomiczne/Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach. 195, 125–139 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  25. https://spis.gov.pl/

  26. Biemer, P., Groves, R., Lyberg, L., Mathiowetz, N., Sudman, S.: Measurement errors in surveys. Technometrics 35 (1991). https://doi.org/10.2307/1269316

  27. Urbański, M., Sudyka, J., Grondys, K.: Expert evaluation of road infrastructure management. 20, 465–492 (2021). https://doi.org/10.7409/rabdim.021.028

  28. Policy Options to Decarbonise Urban Passenger Transport Results of Expert Opinion Survey Guineng Chen, ITF/OECD 19 April 2018. https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/expert-opinion-survey-decarbonising-urban-passenger-transport.pdf

  29. Chekmarevaa, G., Khamburovaa, D., Matyashchukb, S., Fillimonovac, E., Mamaev, E.: XIII International Conference on Transport Infrastructure: Territory Development and Sustainability Expert Methods for Assessing the Quality of Transportation Services.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Norhisham, S., Abu Bakar, M.F., Mohd Azlan, N.N.I., Apandi, S.N.D.I.Y., Khalid, N.H.N.: Overview of methodology for developing expert system based on expert view for quality of urban bus services in Peninsular Malaysia (2021): https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i12/11829

  31. Ogryzek, M., Adamska-Kmieć, D., Klimach, A.: Sustainable transport: an efficient transportation network—case study. Sustainability 12, 8274 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Singh, A., Gurtu, A., Singh, R.K.: Selection of sustainable transport system: a case study. Manag. Environ. Qual. 32(1), 100–113 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2020-0059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Case Studies on Transport Policy a Journal of the World Conference on Transport Research Society. https://www.elsevier.com/journals/case-studies-on-transport-policy/2213-624X?generatepdf=true

  34. Bonnel, P., Munizaga, M.: Transport survey methods - in the era of big data facing new and old challenges. Transp. Res. Procedia 32, 1–15 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2018.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Eisenmann, C., Kuhnimhof, T.: Some pay much but many don’t: vehicle TCO imputation in travel surveys. Transp. Res. Procedia 32, 421–435 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2018.10.056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wielinski, G., Trépanier, M., Morency, C., Habib, K.N.: Comparing multiple data streams to assess free-floating carsharing use. Transp. Res. Procedia (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wittwe, R.R., Hubrich, S., Wittig, S., Gerike, R.: Development of a new method for household travel survey data harmonisation. Transp. Res. Procedia (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Zijlstra, T., Wijgergangs, K., Hoogendoorn-Lanser, S.: Traditional and mobile devices in computer assisted web-interviews. Transp. Res. Procedia (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Zmud, J., Lee-Gosselin, M., Munizaga, M., Carrasco, J.-A. (eds.): Transport Survey Methods: Best Practice for Decision Making, Emerald, UK (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Shatu, F.M., Kamruzzaman, M.D.: Investigating the link between transit oriented development and sustainable travel behavior in Brisbane: a case-control study. J. Sustain. Develop. 7(4), 61–70 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Connor, J., et al.: Driver sleepiness and risk of serious injury to car occupants: population based case control study. BMJ 324(7346), 1125 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Allerston, J., Justham, D.: A case-control study of the transit times through an accident and emergency department of ankle injured patients assessed using the Ottawa Ankle Rules. Accid. Emerg. Nurs. 8(3), 148–154 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Galéra, C., Orriols, L., M’Bailara, K., Laborey, M., Contrand, B., Ribéreau-Gayon, R.: Mind wandering and driving: responsibility case-control study. BMJ 345, e8105 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Pyko, A., et al.: Long-term exposure to transportation noise in relation to development of obesity—a cohort study. Environ. Health Perspect. 125(11), 117005 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Cantuaria, M.L., et al.: Residential exposure to transportation noise in Denmark and incidence of dementia: national cohort study. BMJ 374, n1954 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Perchoux, C., Kestens, Y., Thomas, F., Van Hulst, A., Thierry, B., Chaix, B.: Assessing patterns of spatial behavior in health studies: their socio-demographic determinants and associations with transportation modes (the RECORD Cohort Study). Soc. Sci. Med. 119, 64–73 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Saunders, L.E., Green, J.M., Petticrew, M.P., Steinbach, R., Roberts, H.: What are the health benefits of active travel? A systematic review of trials and cohort studies. PLoS ONE 8(8), e69912 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lee, W., Kang, M.Y., Kim, J., Lim, S.S., Yoon, J.H.: Cancer risk in road transportation workers: a national representative cohort study with 600,000 person-years of follow-up. Sci. Rep. 10(1), 11331 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Brown, J.B., et al.: Geographic variation in outcome benefits of helicopter transport for trauma in the United States: a retrospective cohort study. Ann. Surg. 263(2), 406 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Poulos, R.G., et al.: Near miss experiences of transport and recreational cyclists in New South Wales, Australia. Findings from a prospective cohort study. Accid. Anal. Prev. 101, 143–153 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Goetz, H.M., Creutzinger, K.C., Kelton, D.F., Costa, J.H.C., Winder, C.B., Renaud, D.L.: A randomized controlled trial investigating the effect of transport duration and age at transport on surplus dairy calves: Part I. Impact on health and growth. J. Dairy Sci. 106(4), 2784–2799 (2023)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Awad, L.N., Reisman, D.S., Pohlig, R.T., Binder-Macleod, S.A.: Reducing the cost of transport and increasing walking distance after stroke: a randomized controlled trial on fast locomotor training combined with functional electrical stimulation. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30(7), 661–670 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Rosenfield, A., Attanucci, J.P., Zhao, J.: A randomized controlled trial in travel demand management. Transportation 47(4), 1907–1932 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Brough, R., Freedman, M., Ho, D.E., Phillips, D.C.: Can transportation subsidies reduce failures to appear in criminal court? Evidence from a pilot randomized controlled trial. Econ. Lett. 216, 110540 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Spasojevic, B., Lohmann, G., Scott, N.: Air transport and tourism–a systematic literature review (2000–2014). Curr. Issue Tour. 21(9), 975–997 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Pournader, M., Shi, Y., Seuring, S., Koh, S.L.: Blockchain applications in supply chains, transport and logistics: a systematic review of the literature. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58(7), 2063–2081 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Bellizzi, M.G., Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G.: Air transport service quality factors: a systematic literature review. Transp. Res. Procedia 45, 218–225 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Fraser, S.D., Lock, K.: Cycling for transport and public health: a systematic review of the effect of the environment on cycling. Eur. J. Public Health 21(6), 738–743 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wanner, M., Götschi, T., Martin-Diener, E., Kahlmeier, S., Martin, B.W.: Active transport, physical activity, and body weight in adults: a systematic review. Am. J. Prev. Med. 42(5), 493–502 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Aranda-Balboa, M.J., Huertas-Delgado, F.J., Herrador-Colmenero, M., Cardon, G., Chillón, P.: Parental barriers to active transport to school: a systematic review. Int. J. Public Health 65, 87–98 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Larouche, R., Mammen, G., Rowe, D.A., Faulkner, G.: Effectiveness of active school transport interventions: a systematic review and update. BMC Public Health 18, 1–18 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Villa-González, E., Barranco-Ruiz, Y., Evenson, K.R., Chillón, P.: Systematic review of interventions for promoting active school transport. Prev. Med. 111, 115–134 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Heath, G.W., Brownson, R.C., Kruger, J., Miles, R., Powell, K.E., Ramsey, L.T.: The effectiveness of urban design and land use and transport policies and practices to increase physical activity: a systematic review. J. Phys. Act. Health 3(s1), S55–S76 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Holmgren, J.: Meta-analysis of public transport demand. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 41(10), 1021–1035 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Zamparini, L., Reggiani, A.: Freight transport and the value of travel time savings: a meta-analysis of empirical studies. Transp. Rev. 27(5), 621–636 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Melo, P.C., Graham, D.J., Brage-Ardao, R.: The productivity of transport infrastructure investment: a meta-analysis of empirical evidence. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 43(5), 695–706 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Dimitropoulos, A., Oueslati, W., Sintek, C.: The rebound effect in road transport: a meta-analysis of empirical studies. Energy Economics 75, 163–179 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zamparini, L., Reggiani, A.: Meta-analysis and the value of travel time savings: a transatlantic perspective in passenger transport. Netw. Spat. Econ. 7, 377–396 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Nijkamp, P., Pepping, G.: Meta-analysis for explaining the variance in public transport demand elasticities in Europe. J. of Transp. and Stat. 1(1), 1–14 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  70. Bastiaanssen, J., Johnson, D., Lucas, K.: Does transport help people to gain employment? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Transp. Rev. 40(5), 607–628 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Elsevier Search. https://www.elsevier.com/search-results

  72. Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.pl/

  73. Springer. https://link.springer.com/

  74. Taylor&Francis. https://taylorandfrancis.com/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Transport and Aviation Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Katowice, Poland

    Ireneusz Celiński & Grzegorz Sierpiński

Authors
  1. Ireneusz Celiński
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Grzegorz Sierpiński
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ireneusz Celiński .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Transport and Aviation Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland

    Grzegorz Sierpiński

  2. Al Akhawayn University, Ifrane, Morocco

    Salah Al-Majeed

  3. Faculty of Transport and Aviation Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland

    Elżbieta Macioszek

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Celiński, I., Sierpiński, G. (2024). Levels of Evidence in Transport Research. In: Sierpiński, G., Al-Majeed, S., Macioszek, E. (eds) Advanced Solutions for Mobility in Urban Areas. TSTP 2023. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 907. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53181-1_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation