Accident; analysis and prevention
-
Comparative Study
The effects of mobile phone use on pedestrian crossing behaviour at signalized and unsignalized intersections.
Research amongst drivers suggests that pedestrians using mobile telephones may behave riskily while crossing the road, and casual observation suggests concerning levels of pedestrian mobile-use. An observational field survey of 270 females and 276 males was conducted to compare the safety of crossing behaviours for pedestrians using, versus not using, a mobile phone. ⋯ These effects suggest that talking on a mobile phone is associated with cognitive distraction that may undermine pedestrian safety. Messages explicitly suggesting techniques for avoiding mobile-use while road crossing may benefit pedestrian safety.
-
In Sweden, a written and a driving test must be passed for licensure, and these two examinations are the only means of verifying that learner drivers have acquired the competencies stipulated in the national curriculum. The present study investigated 18-24-year olds regarding the effects of personal background and mode of driver education instruction on the outcome of the driving test. ⋯ The rate of passing was higher for those who started behind-the-wheel training at 16 and applied to take the driving test via a driving school, than for those who started the training at an older age and applied to take the test in person. It was also found that the probability of passing the test was greater if there is successful cooperation between learner and driving school instructor, and if a large proportion of the training been devoted to the task speed adaptation.
-
The use of seat belts and alcohol is often mis-reported in police motor vehicle accident reports for a number of reasons. To avoid penalties, occupants often over report seat belt use and under report alcohol use. Police officers sometimes fail to account for evidence such as presence of belt burn, condition of belts, odor of alcohol, crash patterns, etc. ⋯ Our results showed that the bias of the odds ratio of injury and medical costs due to misclassification of seat belts and alcohol use depended both on the amount of misclassification and the reported frequencies. Misclassification about seat belt and alcohol use only slightly biased the unadjusted odds ratio estimates and mean hospital charge, while misclassification resulted in approximately a 69% underestimate of the total medical costs savings due to seatbelts. However, due to the small size of the merged Nebraska police and hospital data set used to estimate misclassification rates, these results are likely somewhat imprecise.
-
Debate continues over bicycle helmet laws. Proponents argue that case-control studies of voluntary wearing show helmets reduce head injuries. Opponents argue, even when legislation substantially increased percent helmet wearing, there was no obvious response in percentages of cyclist hospital admissions with head injury-trends for cyclists were virtually identical to those of other road users. ⋯ Analyses of other road safety measures, e.g. reducing speeding and drink-driving or treating accident blackspots, often show that benefits are significantly greater than costs. Assuming all parties agree that helmet laws should not be implemented unless benefits exceed costs, agreement is needed on how to derive monetary values for the consequences of helmet laws, including changes in injury rates, cycle-use and enjoyment of cycling. Suggestions are made concerning the data and methodology needed to help clarify the issue, e.g. relating pre- and post-law surveys of cycle use to numbers with head and other injuries and ensuring that trends are not confused with effects of increased helmet wearing.