Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26983365›Full record

ArticleTraffic injury prevention2016

Sobriety checkpoint and open container laws in the United States: Associations with reported drinking-driving.

Kathleen M Lenk, Toben F Nelson, Traci L Toomey, Rhonda Jones-Webb, Darin J Erickson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Traffic injury prevention, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kathleen M Lenka Division of Epidemiology and Community Health , School of Public Health, University of Minnesota , Minneapolis , Minnesota.
Toben F Nelsona Division of Epidemiology and Community Health , School of Public Health, University of Minnesota , Minneapolis , Minnesota.
Traci L Toomeya Division of Epidemiology and Community Health , School of Public Health, University of Minnesota , Minneapolis , Minnesota.
Rhonda Jones-Webba Division of Epidemiology and Community Health , School of Public Health, University of Minnesota , Minneapolis , Minnesota.
Darin J Ericksona Division of Epidemiology and Community Health , School of Public Health, University of Minnesota , Minneapolis , Minnesota.
University of Minnesota · US

Funding

A Comprehensive Analysis of State Alcohol Policy Environment and Its EffectsR01AA017873 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI ERICKSON, DARIN · 2009 to 2012
$1.9M
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA017873
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess how 2 types of drinking-driving laws-permitting sobriety checkpoints and prohibiting open containers of alcohol in motor vehicles-are associated with drinking-driving and how enforcement efforts may affect these associations.

methodsWe obtained 2010 data on state-level drinking-driving laws and individual-level self-reported drinking-driving from archival sources (Alcohol Policy Information System, NHTSA, and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System). We measured enforcement of the laws via a 2009 survey of state patrol agencies. We computed multilevel regression models (separate models for each type of law) that first examined how having the state law predicted drinking-driving, controlling for various state- and individual-level covariates; we then added the corresponding enforcement measure as another potential predictor.

resultsWe found that states with a sobriety checkpoint law, compared with those without a law, had 18.2% lower drinking-driving; states that conducted sobriety checks at least monthly (vs. not conducting checks) had 40.6% lower drinking-driving (the state law variable was not significant when enforcement was added). We found no significant association between having an open container law and drinking-driving, but states that conducted open container enforcement, regardless of having a law, had 17.6% less drinking-driving.

conclusionOur results suggest that having a sobriety checkpoint law and conducting checkpoints as well as enforcement of open containers laws may be effective strategies for addressing drinking-driving.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBehavioral Risk Factor Surveillance SystemDatabases, FactualDriving Under the InfluenceFemaleHumansLaw EnforcementMalePolicySelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesYoung AdultAlcoholenforcementimpaired drivingopen containersobriety checkpoints

Identifiers

PMID26983365
PMCPMC5584594
OpenAlexW2517948483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.