Relative to safety assessment using data from observed crashes, conflict-based road safety assessment can potentially provide additional insights into crash causation processes. Despite numerous review studies on this topic, the application context of conflict measures has been generally overlooked. This study conducts a systematic review of conflict-based safety measures with a specific focus on the context of their applications. This study employs the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines of systematic review and meta-analysis to review conflict measures used for the safety assessment of intersections over the past ten years (2010–19). A total of 386 studies are systematically reviewed to identify conflict measures used for various contexts, including intersection types, traffic operating conditions, study types, and the purpose of the study.

The systematic review indicates that temporal proximity measures, specifically time-to-collision and post-encroachment time, are the most widely used conflict measures regardless of the application context. Other families of conflict measures such as spatial proximity, kinematic, mixed and combinations of measures have also been applied depending on the context. Using the extracted data from relevant studies, linear regression models were developed for time-to-collision and post-encroachment time thresholds at signalized intersections and time-to-collision thresholds at unsignalized intersections. The thresholds are found to be associated with traffic environment types, sources of conflict data and the application purpose of conflict measures. The findings of this study identify several critical gaps in the literature that can help guide future research directions in the conflict-based safety assessment of transport facilities. Critical gaps include the scarcity of validation studies for conflict measures, the lack of suitable techniques to estimate crash risk by severity types, the primary focus on signalized intersections (leaving studies of other facility types underrepresented), and the lack of suitable conflict measures for vulnerable road users.

相对于使用观察到的碰撞数据进行安全评估，基于冲突的道路安全评估可以潜在地提供对碰撞因果过程的额外见解。尽管对此主题进行了大量审查研究，但人们普遍忽视了冲突措施的应用背景。本研究对基于冲突的安全措施进行了系统审查，特别关注其应用的背景。本研究采用系统评价和元分析的首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 系统评价和元分析指南来审查过去十年（2010-19 年）用于交叉路口安全评估的冲突措施。系统地审查了总共 386 项研究，以确定用于各种情况的冲突措施，包括交叉路口类型、

系统评价表明，时间接近性度量，特别是碰撞时间和侵占后时间，是最广泛使用的冲突度量，无论应用环境如何。其他一系列冲突措施，例如空间邻近性、运动学、混合和组合措施，也已根据具体情况应用。使用从相关研究中提取的数据，为信号交叉口的碰撞时间和侵占后时间阈值以及无信号交叉口的碰撞时间阈值开发了线性回归模型。发现阈值与交通环境类型、冲突数据的来源和冲突措施的应用目的有关。本研究的结果确定了文献中的几个关键空白，可以帮助指导未来交通设施基于冲突的安全评估的研究方向。关键差距包括缺乏对冲突措施的验证研究，缺乏按严重程度类型估计碰撞风险的合适技术，主要关注信号交叉口（其他设施类型的研究代表性不足），以及缺乏针对弱势群体的适当冲突措施道路使用者。