Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 422

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modelling area-wide count outcomes with spatial correlation and heterogeneity: An analysis of London crash data

Open access
Quddus, Mohammed A.·2008·Accident Analysis & Prevention

Abstract

Count models such as negative binomial (NB) regression models are normally employed to establish a relationship between area-wide traffic crashes and the contributing factors. Since crash data are collected with reference to location measured as points in space, spatial dependence exists among the area-level crash observations. Although NB models can take account of the effect of unobserved heterogeneity (due to omitted variables in the model) among neighbourhoods, such models may not account for spatial correlation areas. It is then essential to adopt an econometric model that takes account of both spatial dependence and uncorrelated heterogeneity simultaneously among neighbouring units. In studying the spatial pattern of traffic crashes, two types of spatial models may be employed: (i) classical spatial models for higher levels of spatial aggregation such as states, counties, etc. and (ii) Bayesian hierarchical models for all spatial units, especially for smaller scale area-aggregations. Therefore, the primary objectives of this paper is to develop a series of relationships between area-wide different traffic casualties and the contributing factors associated with ward characteristics using both non-spatial models (such as NB models) and spatial models and to identify the similarities and differences among these relationships. The spatial units of the analysis are the 633 census wards from the Greater London metropolitan area. Ward-level casualty data are disaggregated by severity of the casualty (such as fatalities, serious injuries, and slight injuries) and by severity of the casualty related to various road users. The analysis implies that different ward-level factors affect traffic casualties differently. The results also suggest that Bayesian hierarchical models are more appropriate in developing a relationship between area-wide traffic crashes and the contributing factors associated with the road infrastructure, socioeconomic and traffic conditions of the area. This is because Bayesian models accurately take account of both spatial dependence and uncorrelated heterogeneity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aap.2008.03.009

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Cited by

See all 422

Metadata

Authors
Quddus, M. A.
Venue
Accident Analysis & Prevention
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-07
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
1486-1497
ISSN
0001-4575 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2166291596
Cited by
422
References
37
FWCI
24.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Modelling area-wide count outcomes with spatial correlation and heterogeneity: An analysis of London crash data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.aap.2008.03.009
The paper
Quddus, M. A. (2008). Modelling area-wide count outcomes with spatial correlation and heterogeneity: An analysis of London crash data. Accident Analysis & Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2008.03.009

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.