Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21069682›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Speed cameras for the prevention of road traffic injuries and deaths.

Cecilia Wilson, Charlene Willis, Joan K Hendrikz, Robyne Le Brocque, Nicholas Bellamy

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 167 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Safe System Approach and technology-what works?Frontiers in public health · 2024
    Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cecilia WilsonCentre of National Research on Disability and Rehabilitation Medicine, Mayne Medical School, The University of Queensland, Herston Road, Herston, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 4006.
Charlene Willis
Joan K Hendrikz
Robyne Le Brocque
Nicholas Bellamy
University of Queensland · AUMayne Pharma (Australia) · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is estimated that by 2020, road traffic crashes will have moved from ninth to third in the world ranking of burden of disease, as measured in disability adjusted life years. The prevention of road traffic injuries is of global public health importance. Measures aimed at reducing traffic speed are considered essential to preventing road injuries; the use of speed cameras is one such measure.

objectivesTo assess whether the use of speed cameras reduces the incidence of speeding, road traffic crashes, injuries and deaths. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases covering all available years up to March 2010; the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (WebSPIRS), EMBASE (WebSPIRS), TRANSPORT, IRRD (International Road Research Documentation), TRANSDOC (European Conference of Ministers of Transport databases), Web of Science (Science and Social Science Citation Index), PsycINFO, CINAHL, EconLit, WHO database, Sociological Abstracts, Dissertation Abstracts, Index to Theses. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, interrupted time series and controlled before-after studies that assessed the impact of speed cameras on speeding, road crashes, crashes causing injury and fatalities were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed methodological quality, reported study authors' outcomes and where possible, calculated standardised results based on the information available in each study. Due to considerable heterogeneity between and within included studies, a meta-analysis was not appropriate. MAIN

resultsThirty five studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with controls, the relative reduction in average speed ranged from 1% to 15% and the reduction in proportion of vehicles speeding ranged from 14% to 65%. In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%. AUTHORS'

conclusionsDespite the methodological limitations and the variability in degree of signal to noise effect, the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths. However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect.

Indexed as

Accident PreventionAccidents, TrafficControlled Clinical Trials as TopicHumansPhotographyRadarSafety

Identifiers

PMID21069682
PMCPMC11739063
OpenAlexW2108283143

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.