Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16437484›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Interventions for promoting booster seat use in four to eight year olds traveling in motor vehicles.

J E Ehiri, H O D Ejere, L Magnussen, D Emusu, W King, J S Osberg

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

J E EhiriDepartment of Maternal & Child Health, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1665 University Boulevard, Ryals Building, Birmingham, Alabama 35249-0022, USA. jehiri@uab.edu
H O D Ejere
L Magnussen
D Emusu
W King
J S Osberg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublic health and traffic safety agencies recommend use of booster seats in motor vehicles for children aged four to eight years, and various interventions have been implemented to increase their use by individuals who transport children in motor vehicles. There is little evidence regarding the effectiveness of these interventions, hence the need to examine what works and what does not.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of interventions intended to increase acquisition and use of booster seats in motor vehicles among four to eight year olds. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (January 1966 to April 2005), EMBASE (1980 to April 2005), LILACS, Transport Research Databases (1988 to April 2005), Australian Transport Index (1976 to April 2005), additional databases and reference lists of relevant articles. We also contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and controlled before-and-after trials that investigated the effects of interventions to promote booster seat use. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. MAIN

resultsFive studies involving 3,070 individuals met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. All interventions for promoting use of booster seats among 4 to 8 year olds demonstrated a positive effect (relative risk (RR) 1.43; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.05 to 1.96). Incentives combined with education demonstrated a beneficial effect (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.55; n = 1,898). Distribution of free booster seats combined with education also had a beneficial effect (RR 2.34; 95% CI 1.50 to 3.63; n = 380) as did education-only interventions (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.49; n = 563). One study which evaluated enforcement of booster seat law met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis, but demonstrated no marked beneficial effect. AUTHORS'

conclusionsAvailable evidence suggests that interventions to increase use of booster seats among children age four to eight years are effective. Combining incentives (booster seat discount coupons or gift certificates) or distribution of free booster seats with education demonstrated marked beneficial outcomes for acquisition and use of booster seats for four to eight year olds. There is some evidence of beneficial effect of legislation on acquisition and use of booster seats but this was mainly from uncontrolled before-and-after studies, which did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis.

Indexed as

AutomobilesBody WeightChildChild, PreschoolHumansProtective DevicesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSeat Belts

Identifiers

PMID16437484
PMCPMC8805601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.