Deliverable D 1.3 RESULTS OF META-ANALYSIS ... - cast-eu.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Campaigns and awareness raising strategies in traffic safety — <strong>Deliverable</strong> D-1.1Table 7.25. Overall effect of road safety campaigns on road accidents and seatbelt useaccording to time at which outcome measure taken. The results are given after accounting forpublication bias. Each overall effect is based on n individual effects (excluding any artificialeffects generated by trim-and-fill).AccidentsSeatbelt useeffect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)beforeduring-13 (-17;-8) 84 yes +6 (-3;+17) 26 nobeforeafter-9 (-17;-0) 19 yes +29 (+17;+42) 54 yesbeforeduringafter-4 (-22;+18) 12 no +32 (+21;+43) 53 yesTable 7.25 shows no significant difference between accident reduction effectsduring the campaigns (-13 per cent) and after they have been carried out (-9per cent). There were too few effects in the before-during-after group toenable solid conclusions to be made, as reflected by the wide confidenceinterval of -22 to +18 per cent.Seatbelt usage rates are significantly greater after campaign completion, withpost-campaign rates increasing by 29 per cent compared with 6 per centduring the campaign. The overall effect of before-during-after studies wascomparable to that of the before-after studies.7.5.2 THEME AND COUNTRYThe overall effect of campaigns might be expected to vary according to thetheme of the campaign. Table 7.26 shows that the campaigns against drinkdrivingincluded in our sample appear to be very effective, resulting in anoverall significant 20 per cent decrease in accident counts. This is notsurprising since drink-driving is known to increase the risk of accidents morethan other behaviours addressed by campaigns. The effect of drink-drivingcampaigns on accidents cannot be aligned with their effect on drink-drivingbehaviour while evaluations of the latter are so variable. In any case drinkdriving campaigns may raise awareness among road users about road safetyin general, and in doing so decrease the likelihood of other behaviour thatmight lead to accidents. Such a mechanism might indeed explain whyseatbelt-themed campaigns reduce accident counts significantly by 8 per cent(Table 7.26), although this finding must be treated with caution while it isbased on only 5 individual effects.The poor overall effects of campaigns aimed at increasing driver awareness ofpedestrians are also based on only five individual effects. Finally, the overalleffect of speeding campaigns on accident counts appears to be poor (+3 percent), and is not statistically significant.76
Campaigns and awareness raising strategies in traffic safety — <strong>Deliverable</strong> D-1.1Table 7.26. Overall effect of road safety campaigns on road accidents and seatbelt useaccording to campaign theme, and after accounting for publication bias. Each overall effectis based on n individual effects (excluding any artificial effects generated by trim-and-fill).AccidentsSeatbelt useThemeeffect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)General / multiplethemes- 14 (- 25, -1) 9 yes -- -- -- --Drink-driving - 20 (-26, -14) 40 yes -- -- -- --Speeding + 3 (- 7, +14) 26 no -- -- -- --Seatbelts - 8 (-12, -4) 5 yes +25 (+18;+31) 118 yesAwareness ofpedestrians+ 1 (-7, +9) 5 no -- -- -- --Analysis of overall effect by the six countries most represented in thedatabase reveals some differences in campaign success (Table 7.27). TheUSA and the Netherlands have carried out campaigns which have hadstatistically significant overall accident-reducing effects. The campaigns thathave been included from Sweden and Denmark appear to be effective overall,but there might be too few effects for the overall effect to be statisticallysignificant. Interestingly, however, the USA and the Netherlands were also theonly two countries included that carried out campaigns that gave significantoverall seatbelt-use increases, of 28 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively.Table 7.27. Overall effect of road safety campaigns on road accidents and seatbelt useaccording to country carrying out campaign. After accounting for publication bias. Eachoverall effect is based on n individual effects (excluding any artificial effects generated bytrim-and-fill).AccidentsSeatbelt usecountryeffect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)USA -13 (-18;-7) 34 yes +28 (+21;+36) 91 yesAustralia -1 (-10;+10) 30 no +15 (-5;+40) 8 noSweden -16 (-33;+5) 9 no +70 (-1;+172) 9 noThe Netherlands -13 (-24;-1) 7 yes +20 (+10;+30) 6 yesNorway -8 (-16;+0) 15 no -- -- 0 --Denmark -29 (-59;+25) 5 no -- -- 0 --77
Page 1 and 2:
Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26: Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 75: Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151:
show all

Deliverable D 1.3 RESULTS OF META-ANALYSIS ... - cast-eu.org

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?