Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17018674›Full record

ArticleInjury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention2006

Car manufacturers and global road safety: a word frequency analysis of road safety documents.

I Roberts, R Wentz, P Edwards

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Bicycling and walking for transportation in three Brazilian cities.American journal of preventive medicine · 2013
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Formula One and global road safety.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2007
    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

3 authors.

I RobertsDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. Ian.Roberts@lshtm.ac.uk
R Wentz
P Edwards

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe World Bank believes that the car manufacturers can make a valuable contribution to road safety in poor countries and has established the Global Road Safety Partnership (GRSP) for this purpose. However, some commentators are sceptical. The authors examined road safety policy documents to assess the extent of any bias.

designWord frequency analyses of road safety policy documents from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the GRSP.

main outcome measuresThe relative occurrence of key road safety terms was quantified by calculating a word prevalence ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Terms for which there was a fourfold difference in prevalence between the documents were tabulated.

resultsCompared to WHO's World report on road traffic injury prevention, the GRSP road safety documents were substantially less likely to use the words speed, speed limits, child restraint, pedestrian, public transport, walking, and cycling, but substantially more likely to use the words school, campaign, driver training, and billboard.

conclusionsThere are important differences in emphasis in road safety policy documents prepared by WHO and the GRSP. Vigilance is needed to ensure that the road safety interventions that the car industry supports are based on sound evidence of effectiveness.

Indexed as

AutomobilesTerminology as TopicAccidents, TrafficGlobal HealthHumansSafetyWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID17018674
PMCPMC2563458

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.