Health Systems and Policy Research

  • ISSN: 2254-9137
  • Journal h-index: 10
  • Journal CiteScore: 1.70
  • Journal Impact Factor: 1.84
  • Average acceptance to publication time (5-7 days)
  • Average article processing time (30-45 days) Less than 5 volumes 30 days
    8 - 9 volumes 40 days
    10 and more volumes 45 days
Awards Nomination 20+ Million Readerbase
Indexed In
  • China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI)
  • Cosmos IF
  • Scimago
  • Directory of Research Journal Indexing (DRJI)
  • OCLC- WorldCat
  • Publons
  • Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research
  • Euro Pub
  • Google Scholar
  • J-Gate
  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
Share This Page

Mini Review - (2023) Volume 10, Issue 2

Pseudo-Panel Analysis in Danish: Less Cycle of Our Children

Ishita Panday*
Department of Political Science, University of Texas at El Paso, United States
*Correspondence: Ishita Panday, Department of Political Science, University of Texas at El Paso, United States, Email:

Received: 02-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. Iphspr-23-13468; Editor assigned: 04-Feb-2023, Pre QC No. Iphspr-23-13468; Reviewed: 18-Feb-2023, QC No. Iphspr-23-13468; Revised: 21-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. Iphspr- 23-13468 (R); Published: 28-Feb-2023, DOI: 10.36648/2254- 9137.23.10.175


The patterns of cycling demand for the Danish population are examined in this research. We examine the temporal stability of cycling demand preferences for various age cohorts in combination with residential city sizes using pseudopanels based on large-scale cross-sectional data. Demand for cycling is broken down into two effects. First, a "selection" impact in the population that explains the likelihood of being a biker, i.e., participating in cycling activities second, if the respondent is a cyclist, there is a conditional need for cycling kilometres. A Gamma Hurdle model is used to estimate the joint probability model. Three empirical findings stand out from the study's many others. First off, the timeframe shows a fall in total cycling demand in Denmark. It is also demonstrated that this is mostly a selection impact.


Cycling; Pseudo-panel analysis; Hurdle and selection models; Dynamic transport preferences; Transport geography; Econometrics


Therefore, rather than a reduction in trip distances for cyclists, a decreased riding population is essentially the main cause of the observed dip [1]. Thirdly, younger generations, especially those living outside of major cities, are most affected by the downturn [2].

Given that Denmark is a global leader in bicycle culture and has a long history of cycling, we think our findings can help other nations avoid experiencing similar long-term effects [3]. The secondlargest riding population in the EU relative to its population ECF, with a trip share between 14 and 18% over the period from 2000 to 2010, Denmark is a successful bicycle nation internationally [4]. The desire for riding in Denmark is dwindling despite ongoing efforts to raise the bicycle trip share [5]. Denmark is frequently cited as one of the historical pioneers in promoting bicycle use, therefore it is in everyone's best interest to understand why, for whom, and how much this decrease is occurring [6]. It's intriguing because it might help us predict tendencies in nations with less developed cycling cultures and possibly inspire us to take preventative action to slow down such development [7]. The current paper's objective is to identify cycle demand patterns across age cohorts. Discussion of potential underlying causes for the trends that have been noticed [8]. We also talk about potential research agendas for future policy as part of the conversation. In this study, we use a pseudo panel approach based on a comprehensive national trip diary to analyse bicycle preferences [9]. By doing this, it will become clear if people from a particular age group, such as those observed in 2006, behave differently from people from a similar age group recorded later [10].


The paper divides bicycle demand into two primary parts using a methodical approach [11]. First, a selection component that gauges the percentage of people who pedal, and then a mileage component that gauges the distance travelled by each cyclist In a Hurdle-type model, these effects are calculated and assessed across pseudo-panels with age- and gender-specific definitions [12]. Using this method, we can assess the relative significance of the two effects as well as the effects of other explanatory factors on the selection and mileage model [13]. Bicycle demand has recently drawn more attention in academic literature as a research topic [14]. mostly due to growing recognition of the advantages of cycling's beneficial external effects The Danish National Travel Survey has been performed in its current format in Denmark since 2006 [15]. The poll gathers data on the everyday travel routines of about. It is a fairly representative cross-sectional sample of the Danish population between the ages of 10 and includes information on travel patterns from a day-before-interview travel diary. To create a representative sample of the population, survey participants are chosen using stratified random sampling from the Danish Civil Registration System. Only one responder from each household takes part in the survey.


There are also accessible year samples of the poll from 1992 to 2001. Although these older data sets cannot be used alongside more recent data sets, they are appropriate for aggregate analysis. Consequently, the study does not include any data from years before to 2006. In order to avoid the consequences of the Covid-19 lockdown, the analysis also leaves out the years 2020 and 2101. The years following 2019 are in fact considerably different in terms of the overall mode share and miles per person, as can be seen from Tables 1 and 2, which suggests that these years should be removed from the analysis. A total of 175, 683 people are included in the study period's final data set. The number of cars available to the respondent's home, their age, gender, the number of miles they cycled on the survey day, and their urbanisation level are the only factors we take into account in the current study.



Conflict of Interest



  1. Begley CE, Vojvodic RW, Seo M, Burau K (2006) Emergency room use and access to primary care: evidence from Houston Texas. J Health Care Poor Underserved 17: 610-624.
  2. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  3. Gill JM (1999) Use of hospital emergency departments for non-urgent care: a persistent problem with no easy solutions. Am J Managed Care 5: 1565-1568.
  4. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  5. Bennett KJ, Moore CG, Probst JC (2007) Estimating uncompensated care charges at rural hospital emergency departments. J Rural Health Summer 23: 258-263.
  6. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  7. Sullivan AF, Richman IB, Ahn CJ, Auerbach BS, Pallin DJ, et al. (2006) A profile of US emergency departments in 2001. Ann Emerg Med 48: 694-701.
  8. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  9. Ragin DF, Hwang U, Cydulka RK, Holson D, Haley LL, et al. (2005) Reasons for using the Emergency Department: Results of the EMPATH study. Acad Emerg Med 12: 1158-1166.
  10. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  11. Weber E, Showstack J, Hunt K, Colby D, Callaham M (2005) Does lack of a usual source of care or health insurance increase the likelihood of an emergency department visit? Results of a national population-based study Ann Emerg Med 45: 4-12.
  12. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  13. Rust G, Fryer GE, Strothers H, Daniels E, McCann J, et al. (2004) Modifiable Determinants of Health Care Utilization within the African-American population. J National Medical Assoc Sept 96: 1169-1177
  14. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  15. Oster A, Bindman AB (2003) Emergency Department visits for ambulatory care sensitive conditions: insights into preventable hospitalizations. Med Care 41: 198-207
  16. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  17. Van Dis J (2002) Where we live: health care in rural vs urban America. JAMA 287: 108.
  18. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  19. Smith Campbell B (2000) Access to health care: effects of public funding on the uninsured. J Nurs Scholarsh 32: 295-300.
  20. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  21. Smith Campbell B (2005) Emergency department and community health center visits and costs in an uninsured population. J Nurs Scholarsh 37: 80-86.
  22. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  23. Pearce N (2000) The ecological fallacy strikes back. J Epidemiol Community Health 54: 326-327.
  24. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  25. Diez Roux AV (1998) Bringing context back into epidemiology: variables and fallacies in multilevel analysis. Am J Public Health 88: 216-222.
  26. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  27. Richman IB, Clark S, Sullivan AF, Camargo CA (2007) Jr National study of the relation of primary care shortages to emergency department utilization. Acad Emerg Med  14: 279-282
  28. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

  29. Gardner W, Mulvey EP, Shaw EC (1995) Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed Poisson, and negative binomial models. Psychol Bull 118: 392-404.
  30. Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

Citation: Ishita Panday (2023) Pseudo-Panel Analysis in Danish: Less Cycle of Our Children. Health Sys Policy Res Vol. 10 No. Issue 2:175