“We also asked people to categorise how annoying or scary these incidents were, and about 1 in 7 were really scary, like big HGVs close overtaking or cars pulling out of side roads. A lot of the incidents were close passes, about a third of them. “

And a significant portion of this close overtaking was happening on link sections, rather than at junctions which are traditionally viewed as the main danger point for cyclists. The full results will be published shortly, and Dr Aldred already has plans to work with local interested local authorities on addressing near miss hotspots that appeared in the data.

The project is about more than just avoiding injury, however.

“It’s also about improving the cycling experience. Those of us who cycle regularly know that the chances of being injured are really very low indeed. There are also on-going debates about how people feel about cycling – do they feel it’s too dangerous. “

“That for me is important if we want to get more people cycling. We can’t just say you’ll be safe, we need to be able to say you’ll feel safe too. “

Although an keen cyclist herself, Dr Aldred didn’t set out to work in transport planning and infrastructure at all. ‘I did a PhD about the Sociology of Healthcare, and I was doing a lot of walking around areas of East London that have a big problem with ‘severance’.

It’s got rail lines and roads and the river and canals. The people who lived there couldn’t get to the shops because there was transport infrastructure in the way. So I got interested in that.”

Her first funded project was ‘Cycling Cultures’, a fascinating study that threw up issues with infrastructure, but also another element that regular cyclists will be familiar with.

“There was a lot of hostility towards cyclists. They were seen as incompetent road users, and then also because they are told to wear helmets and high viz, they were then seen as too competent – the stereotypical lycra lout.  It’s almost like people couldn’t win.”