Distraction and driving: Results from a case–control responsibility study of traffic crash injured drivers interviewed at the emergency room

Comparing responsible and non-responsible drivers to assess determinants of road traffic collisions: time to standardise and revisit

“…Sample size varied from 341 to 362 547 (median: 3398; IQR: 1102 to 72 685). The reported objective was unclear in two papers,13 26 or was stated as an assessment of the association of studied exposures with either responsibility (13 papers),14–21 25 27–29 31 or risk or severity of collisions (4 papers) 22–24 30…”

“…Only three Australian studies strictly applied the original method.,8 13–15 and five studies modified the definition 16 21–24 28 31 Seven studies applied a definition of responsibility which was not that of Robertson and Drummer,18–20 25–27 29 30 including four who cited the original method but actually only used a responsibility assessment reported by the police26 or a driver's questionnaire 19 20 25. Hours et al 20 validated their method on a subsample by comparing responsibility as assessed by the questionnaire, and by applying the original method.…”

Distraction-related road traffic collisions

“…Authors from France stated that their two observational epidemiological studies were the first to assess the risk of RTC related to driver's distraction in the Emergency Departments. They found that distraction caused 8 to 17% of RTCs 11,12 .…”

The effects of texting on driving performance in a driving simulator: The influence of driver age

“…Lam (2002) estimated that distractions were responsible for approximately 4% of traffic crashes; more recently, Bakiri et al (2013) suggested that distraction-related factors accounted for 8% of injurious road crashes. The National Safety Council (NSC, 2010) reported that cell phone use of any sort causes 28% of all crashes each year.…”