The culpability of drivers killed in New Zealand road crashes and their use of alcohol and other drugs

The odds of wrong-way crashes and resulting fatalities: A comprehensive analysis

“…The NTSB Report also noted that 69% of the WWD drivers were impaired and that the 70-plus year-olds are at a particularly high risk. The impact of alcohol and drugs, and the E-mail addresses: hponnal@yahoo.com, hponnal@gmail.com need for accommodating the elderly driver were also stressed by Poulsen et al (2014) and Sagberg (2003). Experiences from France (Kemel, 2015) and the Netherlands (De Niet and Blokpoel, 2000) provide a comprehensive background on WWD incidence in the European Union.…”

Drug Use among Iranian Drivers Involved in Fatal Car Accidents

“…Different populations are being enrolled to the epidemiological studies on drugged driving (8, 9, 11–17). This includes general populations, drivers, professional drivers, and drivers who become involved in crashes (18, 19).…”

Amphetamine-type stimulant use and the risk of injury or death as a result of a road-traffic accident: A systematic review of observational studies

“…Where appropriate, both the crude values and those values adjusted for potentially confounding variables were assessed and reported. The culpability ratio provided in one study (Poulsen et al, 2014) was converted to derive a point estimate odds ratio by dividing the culpability ratio of the particular portion of the driver population culpable by the culpability ratio of the control group. Heterogeneity between studies was initially evaluated with the I 2 statistic as a measure of the proportion of total variation in estimates due to heterogeneity, where I 2 values of 25%, 50%, and 75% correspond to cut-off points for low, moderate, and high degrees of heterogeneity, respectively.…”

“…Initial assessment of the uniformity of the included studies using meta analytic software (RevMan) (Collaboration, 2003) revealed significant heterogeneity between a sub-set of four eligible case-control studies (Gjerde et al, 2013;Kuypers et al, 2012;Laumon et al, 2005;Movig et al, 2004) (Chi 2 =12.00, df=3 (p=0.007); I 2 =75%). Assessment of heterogeneity of the remaining four case-control studies (Bernhoft et al, 2012;Bogstrand et al, 2015;Gadegbeku et al, 2011;Gjerde et al, 2011) was not performed due to missing information (such as specific exposure rates between cases and controls for amphetamines), and assessment of study heterogeneity of the n=1 cohort study was not appropriate (Poulsen et al, 2014). As a result, we decided to apply a 'best evidence synthesis' approach to all case-control and cohort studies, which comprised a modified version of that previously outlined by Lievense and colleagues (see Table 1) (Lievense et al, 2001).…”