Search

Abstract: Introduction: There are many factors that influence older adults'' travel choices. This paper explores the associations between mode of travel choice for a short trip and older adults'' personal characteristics. Methods: This study included 406 drivers over the age of 64 who were enrolled in a large integrated health plan in the United States between 1991 and 2001. Bivariate analyses and generalized linear modeling were used to examine associations between choosing to walk or drive and respondents'' self-reported general health, physical and functional abilities, and confidence in walking and driving. Results: Having more confidence in their ability to walk versus drive increased an older adult''s likelihood of walking to make a short trip by about 20% (PR=1.22; 95% CI: 1.06-1.40), and walking for exercise increased the likelihood by about 50% (PR=1.53; 95% CI=1.22-1.91). Reporting fair or poor health decreased the likelihood of walking, as did cutting down on the amount of driving due to a physical problem. Discussion: Factors affecting a person''s decision to walk for exercise may not be the same as those that influence their decision to walk as a mode of travel. It is important to understand the barriers to walking for exercise and walking for travel to develop strategies to help older adults meet both their exercise and mobility needs. Impact on Industry: Increasing walking over driving among older adults may require programs that increase confidence in walking and encourage walking for exercise. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Introduction: In this paper, we show that FARS data can be a comparable alternative to observational NOPUS data in estimating seat belt use in the United States once we correct for sample selection bias. Results: Based on assumptions of independence for seatbelt choice, we establish a lower and upper bound for seatbelt usage rates, and find that once we correct for sample selection bias, the seatbelt usage estimates from the corrected FARS emerge at least as a comparable alternative to NOPUS estimates. Impact on Industry: This implies that researchers can use corrected FARS to complement NOPUS, thus being able to utilize the rich cross-sectional details available in FARS data to analyze various relevant research questions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Click It or Ticket is an occupant protection Selective Traffic Enforcement Program (sTEP) combining intensive paid and earned publicity with enforcement during a brief two to four week period. North Carolina demonstrated substantial increases in safety belt use associated with their implementation of the first statewide Click It or Ticket program in 1993. In 2000, Click It or Ticket was implemented in South Carolina. In 2001, Click It or Ticket was implemented across all eight states of the southeast. In 2002, ten states in various parts of the country implemented Click It or Ticket; four states implemented parts of the full Click It or Ticket program; and four states were used as comparisons. Belt use increases were greatest in the full implementation states. Click It or Ticket was implemented nationally in 2003. This paper presents a historical perspective on the implementation and evaluation of Click It or Ticket programs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

North Carolina was the first United States jurisdiction to implement a statewide program (called Click It or Ticket) coupling concentrated enforcement with massive publicity to increase seat belt use. After a successful pilot program in three very different North Carolina communities, the statewide program was launched in October 1993, and has been most active and productive as well as imitated by many other states over the past decade. This paper explores the combination of ingredients that have been employed and sustained over that period of time. These include: (a) a basic coalition of critical public-private agencies (central to the planning, execution, and publicity of the many Click It or Ticket programs); (b) critical top-down commitments (starting with the governor); (c) pervasive and innovative media events/press releases/ PSAs/ web site information; (d) vigorous and well-publicized law enforcement; (e) feedback on results with solid, updated data; (f) related statewide and local programs/activities; and last but not least (g) continuous funding. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]