Trial reportPloS one2013
The advocacy for pedestrian safety study: cluster randomised trial evaluating a political advocacy approach to reduce pedestrian injuries in deprived communities.
Trial report in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of road safety interventions: An evidence and gap map.Campbell systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Partisan differences in the effects of economic evidence and local data on legislator engagement with dissemination materials about behavioral health: a dissemination trial.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- Determinants of using children's mental health research in policymaking: variation by type of research use and phase of policy process.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Dissemination Strategies to Accelerate the Policy Impact of Children's Mental Health Services Research.Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) · 2020Article
- Parent supervision attributes profile questionnaire (PSAPQ) for young children: psychometric properties of the Chinese version.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Audience segmentation to disseminate behavioral health evidence to legislators: an empirical clustering analysis.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- All Wales Injury Surveillance System revised: development of a population-based system to evaluate single-level and multilevel interventions.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2016Article
- Determinants of Behavior of Students as Pedestrian and Car Occupants in Relation to Traffic Laws in 2013, Gorgan, Iran; An Application of Health Belief Model.Bulletin of emergency and trauma · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether advocacy targeted at local politicians leads to action to reduce the risk of pedestrian injury in deprived areas.
designCluster randomised controlled trial.
setting239 electoral wards in 57 local authorities in England and Wales.
participants617 elected local politicians.
interventionsIntervention group politicians were provided with tailored information packs, including maps of casualty sites, numbers injured and a synopsis of effective interventions.
main outcome measures25-30 months post intervention, primary outcomes included: electoral ward level: percentage of road traffic calmed; proportion with new interventions; school level: percentage with 20 mph zones, Safe Routes to School, pedestrian training or road safety education; politician level: percentage lobbying for safety measures. Secondary outcomes included politicians' interest and involvement in injury prevention, and facilitators and barriers to implementation.
resultsPRIMARY OUTCOMES DID NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFER: % difference in traffic calming (0.07, 95%CI: -0.07 to 0.20); proportion of schools with 20 mph zones (RR 1.47, 95%CI: 0.93 to 2.32), Safe Routes to School (RR 1.34, 95%CI: 0.83 to 2.17), pedestrian training (RR 1.23, 95%CI: 0.95 to 1.61) or other safety education (RR 1.16, 95%CI: 0.97 to 1.39). Intervention group politicians reported greater interest in child injury prevention (RR 1.09, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.16), belief in potential to help prevent injuries (RR 1.36, 95%CI 1.16 to 1.61), particularly pedestrian safety (RR 1.55, 95%CI 1.19 to 2.03). 63% of intervention politicians reported supporting new pedestrian safety schemes. The majority found the advocacy information surprising, interesting, effectively presented, and could identify suitable local interventions.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of an innovative approach to translational public health by targeting local politicians in a randomised controlled trial. The intervention package was positively viewed and raised interest but changes in interventions were not statistically significance. Longer term supported advocacy may be needed.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN91381117.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.