ArticleAccident; analysis and prevention2017
Adolescent and adult drivers' mobile phone use while driving with different interlocutors.
Article in Accident; analysis and prevention, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Head and Neck Injuries Associated With Cell Phone Use.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2020Article
- Adolescents' perspectives on distracted driving legislation.Journal of safety research · 2019Article
- Talking with teens about traffic safety: Initial feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of a parent-targeted intervention for primary care settings.Journal of safety research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe examined the frequency of adolescents' and their parents' mobile phone use while driving (MPUWD) in the context of their peer and parent-child interlocutors (i.e., communication partners), considering individual differences in perceived risk and symptoms of technology addiction.
methodsNinety-four participants (47 parent-adolescent dyads) completed a survey battery measuring their symptoms of technology addiction, perceived risk of MPUWD, and MPUWD with family members and with their peers as assessed via the proportion of trips when drivers used a mobile phone to communicate.
resultsFor both adolescents and their parents across both types of interlocutors (parent-child, peer), stronger risk perceptions were associated with less MPUWD, and stronger symptoms of technology addiction were associated with more MPUWD. A three-way interaction among technology addiction, interlocutor (parent-child, peer), and driver (parent, adolescent) was observed. For adolescents, the association between technology addiction and MPUWD was significantly stronger for MPUWD with their peers than it was for their MPUWD with their parents; this association was not observed for parents. Parents engaged in MPUWD with their children as frequently as adolescents engaged in MPUWD with their peers.
conclusionsSymptoms of technology addiction play a stronger role for adolescents' MPUWD with their peers than it does for adolescents' MPUWD with their parents. These and other driver-by-interlocutor interactions should be considered in future research on distracted driving and in prevention efforts.
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.