ReviewTraffic injury prevention2013
Strengthening impaired-driving enforcement in the United States.
Review in Traffic injury prevention, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Alcohol consumption for simulated driving performance: A systematic review.Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi · 2017Pooled it
- Article
- Optimizing sobriety checkpoints to maximize public health benefits and minimize operational costs.Injury epidemiology · 2023Article
- Applying Bayesian cognitive models to decisions to drive after drinking.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2021Article
- Alcohol-Related Risk of Driver Fatalities in Motor Vehicle Crashes: Comparing Data From 2007 and 2013-2014.Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2018Article
- Curbing the DUI offender's self-efficacy to drink and drive: A laboratory study.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2017Article
- The Utility of Including the Strengths of Underage Drinking Laws in Determining Their Effect on Outcomes.Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveProgress in reducing alcohol-impaired driving crash fatalities in the United States has stagnated over the last 15 years. This article reviews 2 current U.S. driving-while-intoxicated (DWI) laws and their enforcement with an aim toward generating opportunities to improve their enforcement approaches.
methodsImpaired-driving enforcement methods in Europe and Australia are compared with those in the United States, and the legal basis for current DWI criminal procedures is examined.
resultsAn examination of relevant U.S. Supreme Court decisions and current legal practices indicates that the requirements for use of breath test technology to determine blood alcohol concentrations of drivers on public roads are not entirely clear. Several potential methods for using field breath test technology to improve the detection of impaired drivers are suggested. These include (a) breath testing all drivers stopped for certain violations that have a high probability of involving an impaired driver, (b) breath testing all drivers at sobriety checkpoints, and (c) breath testing all drivers involved in fatal and serious injury crashes.
conclusionsBreath test technology has enabled other countries around the world to adopt and implement enforcement strategies that serve as both general and specific deterrents to alcohol-impaired driving. Many of these enforcement strategies have been shown to be effective. If any one of these strategies can be adopted in the United States, further progress in reducing impaired driving is probable. It may be necessary to provide the U.S. Supreme Court with a test case of breath testing all drivers at a sobriety checkpoint, depending upon whether or not a police agency is willing to use that strategy.
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.