thèse doctorat de l'université bordeaux 2 - ISPED-Enseignement à ...

Table 16. Factors associated with hazard perception of high- and low-risk sites onYaoundé-Douala and Karachi-Hala road sectionsModel 1 Model 2 Model 3OR 95% CI OR 95% CI OR 95% CIDriverAge (y)- 18-25 1.93 1.50-2.48 1.95 1.71-2.22 2.09 1.53-2.82- 26-35 1.21 1.03-1.42 1.20 1.12-1.30 1.23 1.02-1.49- 36-45 1 1 1- > 45 1.00 0.84-1.19 1.00 0.91-1.08 1.00 0.81-1.23Vehicle driven- Truck * 1 1- Motorcar 0.71 0.62-0.82 0.70 0.65-0.75 0.69 0.58-0.81- Mini-bus 0.85 0.64-1.13 0.85 0.73-0.98 0.83 0.61-1.16- Mini-truck 0.68 0.50-0.92 0.67 0.58-0.78 0.66 0.46-0.94- Bus 1.38 1.10-1.74 1.39 1.24-1.55 1.40 1.08-1.86SiteCameroon vs. Pakistan 6.53 4.91-8.68 6.88 5.26-9.02 7.61 6.55-8.85Straight vs. curve 0.72 0.58-0.88 0.69 0.56-0.86 0.69 0.62-0.76Irregular vs. regular road surface 4.78 3.74-6.09 4.61 3.71-5.75 5.36 4.71-6.11Flat vs. hill 0.57 0.48-0.69 0.54 0.45-0.65 0.54 0.50-0.60Intersection vs. none 1.46 1.13-1.90 1.40 1.08-1.82 1.49 1.30-1.73Work zone 24.34 15.00-39.51 23.33 14.43-37.71 31.82 24.53-41.26Lane width ≤ 8 m vs. > 8 m- High-risk 0.51 0.43-0.61 0.50 0.37-0.68 0.48 0.42-0.56- Low-risk 18.48 10.39-32.85 22.64 12.42-41.26 23.57 17.29-32.14Built-up area vs. rural- High-risk 0.58 0.51-0.68 0.67 0.49-0.90 0.57 0.46-0.69- Low-risk 2.04 1.51-2.74 2.29 1.69-3.09 2.18 1.86-2.56Vertical road sign- High-risk 2.75 2.38-3.16 2.64 2.02-3.44 2.94 2.48-3.50- Low-risk 0.50 0.34-0.72 0.50 0.36-0.70 0.47 0.39-0.58U-turn- High-risk 8.00 6.36-10.22 7.69 5.09-11.62 9.58 7.50-12.24- Low-risk 0.62 0.39-0.97 0.65 0.43-0.99 0.60 0.47-0.76TrafficHeavy traffic 0.37 0.29-0.47 0.41 0.33-0.51 0.34 0.30-0.39Manoeuvring vehicle 1.91 1.50-2.42 1.82 1.45-2.32 2.01 1.77-2.29Oppositely coming traffic 2.05 1.56-2.69 2.15 1.64-2.82 2.18 1.88-2.53Motorcycle 0.53 0.38-0.75 0.52 0.37-0.74 0.51 0.43-0.61Rain- High-risk 0.19 0.15-0.24 0.17 0.11-0.27 0.16 0.13-0.20- Low-risk 0.47 0.29-0.78 0.48 0.29-0.79 0.45 0.35-0.58See Appendix 8 for more details on univariate analysesOR – Odds ratio95% CI – 95% confidence intervalModel 1 – Without random effectModel 2 – Site as random effectModel 3 – Driver as random effect* Motorcyclists were not analyzed separately, as no differences were observed.55