Projecting Fatalities in Crashes Involving Older Drivers, 2000-2025

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3.4.2 Other GM Project Results (Projects G.1 and G.8) The settlement agreement between GM and DOT includes other projects that are related to the objectives of this research. The most closely related project is Project G.1, “Changes in Crash Involvement Rates as Drivers Age.” The purpose of Project G.1 was to determine how a number of risks vary with driver age from two distinct perspectives. The first problem was to determine how risks change that older drivers themselves face – a matter mainly of concern to the older driver. The second problem was to determine how risks change that older drivers impose on other road users – a matter mainly of concern to the general public. Evans, Gerrish, and Taheri (1998) used data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) for 1994-1996 and other data sources (same time frame) to compare crashes and crash rates of older drivers to those of other age groups. They arrived at the following preliminary findings: • During the 1994-96 time frame, the average number of driver fatalities per year (all motorized vehicles) reached its maximum value at age 21.5 for males (593.5 fatalities) and age 18.5 for females (191.7 fatalities) and then generally decreased. Therefore, when looking at a simple count of fatalities, younger drivers are fatally injured in traffic crashes far more often than the older driver. • When the number of fatalities (by age and gender) is divided by overall population, driver deaths per capita for males are highest among males under 22 and over 80. Females show a similar but much more muted pattern. • Driver fatalities per licensed driver show a similar pattern to that of fatalities per population. That is, the fatality rate as measured by the greatest number of fatalities per licensed driver occurs in ages under 22 and over 80. • Using data from FARS and also the NPTS, driver fatalities per unit distance traveled was computed. This measure shows a similar pattern although even more pronounced at the under 22 and over 80 ages because older and younger drivers drive fewer miles than drivers between the ages of 22 and 80. GM Project G.6 3 - 28 October 2000
Evans, Gerrish, and Taheri (1998) went on to examine influences that affect the crash risk – e.g., amount and type of driving, driving capabilities, vehicle type, time of day, alcohol consumption, seat belt use, and driving risks. Results indicated that rates of severe crash involvements per vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were smaller for the elderly than for drivers under 20 years of age. Evans, Gerrish, and Taheri (1998) compared the risks that elderly drivers impose on others by examining involvements in single-vehicle crashes involving pedestrians. The authors noted that “licensing an older driver (data goes up to age 80) does not pose a greater threat to other road users than licensing younger drivers – indeed it poses substantially less risk than licensing a 20-year-old” (Evans, Gerrish, and Taheri, 1998, p. 12). GM Project G.8, “Investigations of Crashes and Casualties Associated with Older Drivers,” used detailed crash data from North Carolina data sets to compare fault and violation records of drivers over age 65 with fault and violation records for drivers age 45 to 64. Using North Carolina data sets as well as national data, the project investigated the harm rendered by the older driver to self as well as the harm to other drivers. This research resulted in the following highlights: • The percent of at-fault drivers in two-vehicle crashes increase steadily from 40% for 45-54 year olds to approximately 80% for the oldest drivers in the North Carolina data; very similar trends appear in the FARS data. • Corresponding odds ratios for chances of being at fault for age categories 55- 64, 65-74, 75-84, and 85+ relative to those 45-54 are 1.22, 1.77, 3.27, and 4.57, respectively. • Older drivers are increasingly at fault for (1) left-turn maneuver crashes, (2) right-turn crashes, and (3) straight-ahead angle crashes. • In single-vehicle crashes involving drivers 65+, a very high 9.2% resulted in serious injury or fatality. • The older driver has special problems at non-signalized intersections. GM Project G.6 3 - 29 October 2000
Page 1:
ORNL-6963 Projecting Fatalities in
Page 4 and 5:
4. ANALYSIS OF DATA SETS ..........
Page 6 and 7: GM Project G.6 vi October 2000
Page 8 and 9: LIST OF TABLES Table ES-1 Elderly D
Page 10 and 11: Table A.5.3 Projected Total Fatalit
Page 12 and 13: NASS National Automotive Sampling S
Page 14 and 15: Over the past century, the numbers
Page 16 and 17: Figure ES-1. Projected Active Drive
Page 18 and 19: Table ES-1. Elderly Driver Fatality
Page 20 and 21: 1. INTRODUCTION America is graying.
Page 22 and 23: of existing data bases, including h
Page 24 and 25: various data sources and their abil
Page 26 and 27: Finally, data sets should contain,
Page 28 and 29: • Examine data sources to determi
Page 30 and 31: health care, resulting in longer li
Page 32 and 33: Age group Table 3.2. Projected Rati
Page 34 and 35: that individuals will not retire at
Page 36 and 37: analysis. Distribution of the elder
Page 38 and 39: More elderly people live in rural a
Page 40 and 41: assessments of health status) does
Page 42 and 43: 3.2.2 Impacts of Increasing Frailty
Page 44 and 45: current vision screening tests at d
Page 46 and 47: Number of Licenses (thousands) 100
Page 48 and 49: 3.3.2 Changes in Driving Habits In
Page 50 and 51: Transportation Survey (NPTS) data,
Page 52 and 53: tourist services, and “smart” s
Page 54 and 55: Specific highway enhancements to re
Page 58 and 59: • As age increased, being struck
Page 60 and 61: men using mid-1990s data, this gend
Page 62 and 63: major contributing factor as was dr
Page 64 and 65: Total (percent) 100 80 60 40 20 0 A
Page 66 and 67: cohort behavior and conditions for
Page 68 and 69: 4.2.3 Drivers and Driving Distance
Page 70 and 71: The HRS and the AHEAD studies are c
Page 72 and 73: these data and weights. Because of
Page 74 and 75: U.S. Census Bureau (http://www.cens
Page 76 and 77: 5. OVERVIEW OF THE MODELING SYSTEM
Page 78 and 79: or acquisition costs, of the goods
Page 80 and 81: institutionalized settings, our pro
Page 82 and 83: elationships between health and the
Page 84 and 85: 6. THE PROPORTION OF THE ELDERLY PO
Page 86 and 87: Employment status represents a deri
Page 88 and 89: statistical relationship exists bet
Page 90 and 91: more likely to be drivers if there
Page 92 and 93: Statistics (BLS) projections beyond
Page 94 and 95: considerably greater proportional c
Page 96 and 97: Table 6.3 (continued) Western Men W
Page 98 and 99: Daily Person Trips/Person Figure 7.
Page 100 and 101: Second, VMT as a consumption item i
Page 102 and 103: century on which we are unable to o
Page 104 and 105: The health status effects are posit
Page 106 and 107:
significant one in the final set of
Page 108 and 109:
empirically derived regression coef
Page 110 and 111:
GM Project G.6 7 - 14 October 2000
Page 112 and 113:
Table 7.3. Determinants of Projecte
Page 114 and 115:
8. FATAL CRASH RATES 8.1 MODELING F
Page 116 and 117:
The other fatality risk concept we
Page 118 and 119:
dropped. Since these measures have
Page 120 and 121:
have a regular pattern over the age
Page 122 and 123:
Table 8.2. Total Risk Crash Rate Re
Page 124 and 125:
projection the asymptotic behavior
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
percentages of people driving, and
Page 132 and 133:
9.1.1 Computations The projection o
Page 134 and 135:
Figure 9.2, the combination of thes
Page 136 and 137:
Table 9.1. Sensitivity of Total Dri
Page 138 and 139:
material, dampening effect on drive
Page 140 and 141:
Table 9.2. Sensitivity of 2025 Proj
Page 142 and 143:
Age group Table 9.6. Sensitivity of
Page 144 and 145:
9.3.1 The Effect of Time on VMT Pro
Page 146 and 147:
Figure 9.4. Projected VMT, Women (U
Page 148 and 149:
Figure 9.6. Component Contributions
Page 150 and 151:
Step 1: Introduction Step 2: Decisi
Page 152 and 153:
Step 3a: Modifying Income at differ
Page 154 and 155:
Clicking on one of the sheet tabs w
Page 156 and 157:
10. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOM
Page 158 and 159:
similarly relied on a regression mo
Page 160 and 161:
trend of fatal crashes in the futur
Page 162 and 163:
The base of exposure to crash risk
Page 164 and 165:
population, and a slightly smaller
Page 166 and 167:
Second, improvements in health stat
Page 168 and 169:
projections of VMT may be high. Our
Page 170 and 171:
of entry/exit, safety, security, et
Page 172 and 173:
Blincoe, Lawrence. 1994. Estimating
Page 174 and 175:
College of Commerce and Business Ad
Page 176 and 177:
National Association of Development
Page 178 and 179:
Suen, S. Ling, C. G. B. Mitchell, a
Page 180 and 181:
GLOSSARY Baby boomers Persons born
Page 182 and 183:
Table A.1.2. Projections of Vehicle
Page 184 and 185:
Table A.1.4. Projections of Vehicle
Page 186 and 187:
Table A.2.2. Projections of Drivers
Page 188 and 189:
Table A.2.4. Projections of Drivers
Page 190 and 191:
Table A.3.2. Elder Driver Fatality
Page 192 and 193:
Table A.3.4. Elder Driver Fatality
Page 194 and 195:
Table A.4.2. Projected Elderly Driv
Page 196 and 197:
Table A.4.4. Projected Elderly Driv
Page 198 and 199:
Table A.5.2. Projected Total Fatali
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Table B.1. Projections of Non-Insti
Page 208 and 209:
Table B.3. Projections of Non-Insti
Page 210 and 211:
B.2. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES PROJECTI
Page 212 and 213:
Table B.5. Male DRI Income Projecti
Page 214 and 215:
B.2.1.2. Projection Adjustments to
Page 216 and 217:
B.2.5 Seatbelt Use Our projections
Page 218 and 219:
C.3. DECREASING GROWTH RATES OF DRI
Page 220:
GM Project G.6 C - 4 October 2000 T
show all

Projecting Fatalities in Crashes Involving Older Drivers, 2000-2025

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?