Search

BackgroundRoadside observational studies play a fundamental role in designing evidence-informed strategies to address the pressing global health problem of road traffic injuries. Paper-based data collection has been the standard method for such studies, although digital methods are gaining popularity in all types of primary data collection. ObjectiveThis study aims to understand the reliability, productivity, and efficiency of paper vs digital data collection based on three different road user behaviors: helmet use, seatbelt use, and speeding. It also aims to understand the cost and time efficiency of each method and to evaluate potential trade-offs among reliability, productivity, and efficiency. MethodsA total of 150 observational sessions were conducted simultaneously for each risk factor in Mumbai, India, across two rounds of data collection. We matched the simultaneous digital and paper observation periods by date, time, and location, and compared the reliability by subgroups and the productivity using Pearson correlations (r). We also conducted logistic regressions separately by method to understand how similar results of inferential analyses would be. The time to complete an observation and the time to obtain a complete dataset were also compared, as were the total costs in US dollars for fieldwork, data entry, management, and cleaning. ResultsProductivity was higher in paper than digital methods in each round for each risk factor. However, the sample sizes across both methods provided a precision of 0.7 percentage points or smaller. The gap between digital and paper data collection productivity narrowed across rounds, with correlations improving from r=0.27-0.49 to 0.89-0.96. Reliability in risk factor proportions was between 0.61 and 0.99, improving between the two rounds for each risk factor. The results of the logistic regressions were also largely comparable between the two methods. Differences in regression results were largely attributable to small sample sizes in some variable levels or random error in variables where the prevalence of the outcome was similar among variable levels. Although data collectors were able to complete an observation using paper more quickly, the digital dataset was available approximately 9 days sooner. Although fixed costs were higher for digital data collection, variable costs were much lower, resulting in a 7.73% (US $3011/38,947) lower overall cost. ConclusionsOur study did not face trade-offs among time efficiency, cost efficiency, statistical reliability, and descriptive comparability when deciding between digital and paper, as digital data collection proved equivalent or superior on these domains in the context of our project. As trade-offs among cost, timeliness, and comparability—and the relative importance of each—could be unique to every data collection project, researchers should carefully consider the questionnaire complexity, target sample size, implementation plan, cost and logistical constraints, and geographical contexts when making the decision between digital and paper.

Road traffic injuries (RTIs) remain a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in Southeast Asia. We aim to estimate the prevalence and predictors of rear seatbelt use, a key behavioural risk factor for RTI, in Bandung and Bangkok, two cities in Southeast Asia. Roadside observational studies were conducted to provide a representative picture of the prevalence in each city. From eight rounds of observations (July 2015 to April 2019), 39,479 and 7,207 rear-seat passengers were observed in Bandung and Bangkok. Across all rounds, 4.2% of rear-seat passengers used seatbelts in Bandung, compared to 8.4% in Bangkok. In both cities, males and adults, as compared to females and adolescents (aged 12-17 years), had higher odds of rear seatbelt use, as did passengers with a restrained driver. Findings highlight the need for rear seatbelt laws in Bandung and improved enforcement of existing rear seatbelt laws in Bangkok. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drink-driving is a major cause of global road traffic fatalities, yet few countries have laws that meet international best practices. One possible reason is the alcohol industry's opposition to meaningful policies that are perceived to directly threaten sales. Our primary objectives are to document alcohol industry involvement in global road safety policies and programmes and to critically evaluate the responses of public health and road safety communities to this involvement. Under the guidance of the Policy Dystopia Model, we used a mixed methods approach in which data were gathered from expert interviews and a mapping review of 11 databases, 5 watchdog websites and 7 alcohol industry-sponsored initiatives. Triangulation was used to identify points of convergence among data sources. A total of 20 expert interviews and 94 documents were analysed. Our study showed that the alcohol industry acknowledges that drink-driving is an issue but argues for solutions that would limit impact on sales, akin to the message 'drink-but do not drive'. Industry actors have been involved in road safety through: (1) coalition coupling and decoupling, (2) information production and management, (3) direct involvement in policymaking and (4) implementation of interventions. Our study also shed light on the lack of cohesion within and among the public health and road safety communities, particularly with regard to the topics of receiving funding from and partnering with the alcohol industry. These results were subsequently used to adapt the Policy Dystopia Model as a conceptual framework that illustrates the ways in which the alcohol industry has been involved in global road safety. Several implications can be drawn from this study, including the urgent need to increase awareness about the involvement of the alcohol industry in road safety and to build a cohesive transnational alcohol control advocacy alliance to curb injuries and deaths related to drink-driving., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.)