ArticleJournal of emergencies, trauma, and shock
Road Traffic Injuries and Fatalities among Drivers Distracted by Mobile Devices.
Article in Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shock. 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.
- The relationship between smartphone use and dry eye disease: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis.Medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Smartphone addiction in Iranian schoolchildren: a population-based study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Quality Assessment of the Road Traffic Health and Safety Apps with a Focus on the Five Rights of Information Management.Perspectives in health information managemen · 2023Article
- Mobile phones are hazardous microbial platforms warranting robust public health and biosecurity protocols.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Assessment of the Influence of Technology-Based Distracted Driving on Drivers' Infractions and Their Subsequent Impact on Traffic Accidents Severity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Head and Neck Injuries Associated With Cell Phone Use.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2020Article
- Potentially Preventable Intensive Care Unit Admissions in the United States, 2006-2015.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextWith increasing ownership of mobile devices (i.e., cell phones and smartphones), it is important to better understand the role of these devices in motor vehicle collision (MVC)-related trauma.
aimsThe primary objective was to synthesize evidence on the proportion of drivers injured or killed in an MVC attributed to driver distraction by a mobile device. As a secondary objective, we assessed for associations between injury risk and mobile device use while driving. SETTINGS AND
designThis study was a systematic review. SUBJECTS AND
methodsWe searched five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, TRIS, and Web of Science) and the gray literature to identify reports of drivers injured (regardless of the severity) or killed in MVCs attributed to mobile device-related distraction by the driver. We evaluated study and driver characteristics, as well as associations between injury risk and mobile device use by drivers. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Descriptive statistics were used to report study characteristics. The proportion of injuries related to driver distraction by mobile devices was calculated for each study.
resultsOverall, 4907 articles were screened, of which 13 met eligibility criteria. The median proportion of distracted-driving-related trauma was 3.4% (range: 0.04% to 44.7%). Three studies evaluated the association between mobile device use and road traffic injury; all found use of a mobile device while driving significantly increased crash risk.
conclusionsThe proportion of road traffic injuries and fatalities attributed to driver distraction by a mobile device ranges from 0.04% to 44.7%. Studies were subject to limitations in the collection of reliable data on distraction-related MVCs.
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.