Contribution of Mobile Phones in Road Accidents - Research Paper Example

A study design on the recent rise in use of mobile phones Introduction Finding the contribution of mobile phones in road accidents is a challenging task. According to BBC News Article (Motorists flouting mobile ban on March 8 2004), drivers use mobile phones although there has been a ban over its usage. The survey report confirms the fact that one in 10 drivers use a mobile phone well aware of the ban. Another survey by Green Flag found that 10% of the total 700 surveyed drivers used a phone while driving. A good number of them (75%) agreed that using a phone while driving affected their driving capability. 1. Literature Review 1.1 Summary In 1975 Peltzman offered the theory of “risk compensation,” whereby drivers make a bargain between the chances of having an accident and “driving intensity” (fast speed, reduced journey time, and more thrills). Deaths of pedestrians, cyclists, and back seat passengers increased (by 8%, 13%, and 28%, respectively) after laws were enacted making the use of seat belts in front seats compulsory in the United Kingdom (Walker et al. 2006, 3). It shows drivers ensure their safety at the cost of others while tilting the balance in favor of “driving intensity”. McCartt et al described a significant short term effect of the law on drivers’ use of mobile phones. It was noticed that the use of mobile phone reduced from 2.3% to 1.1% in the early months after the ban. In the bordering state of Connecticut where no such law was prevalent, the use-rate remained unaffected. A decrease in the use of mobile phone was noticed only when fine was imposed (McCartt and Geary 2010, 11-15) The practice of using mobile phone while driving and causing risk to the public has been observed by Taylor and others of 17,000 drivers at 12 metropolitan road views in Melbourne in October 2002. In total, 315 drivers were found using the mobile phones while driving. Senior drivers used the mobile phone less than their younger counterparts. McEnvoy and others have made a cross-sectional survey to find the use and impact of mobile phones while driving in New South Wales and Western Australia. The survey covered 1347 licensed drivers in the age-group of 18–65 years. The conclusion derived from the survey results pointed that amidst ban use of mobile phone was rampant among young drivers, increasing the probability of causing accidents (Reagan 2006, 628). McEvoy et al. (2005, 630-634) have referred to some epidemiological studies measuring the danger of accidents related to phone use. Police accident reports can not be believed in this context as their reporting on the driver's use of phone is not trustworthy. Two studies noticed mild appreciation in risk among drivers using mobile phones among more random users in comparison to less random users, as verified from the billing records of mobile phone companies. Phone use at the time of the accident was not included in the study. Redelmeier and Tibshirani have compared phone use instantly before the accident with use during the last week with the help of billing records to conclude phone use by drivers involved in accidents causing loss of property. The chance of accident was four times greater when using phones than when not using. Hands-free mobiles offered no safety benefit over hand held phones. Taylor et al have cited six publications to prove that the use of a mobile phone while driving increases the risk of a road accident. The research by Lamble et al and McKnight and McKnight involved a hands-free instrument and studied driver disability, not accident risk. The three papers by Violanti had crucial drawbacks, including no phone billing information to prove that drivers were using their phones at the time of the accident, dependence on police accident reports that needed sincere investigations into serious accidents than non-serious ones. Sample size with only 14 mobile phone users in one study is also very small. These limitations reduce the validity of the research (McEvoy and Stevenson 2004, 43-45). According to the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, “the use of cell phones by drivers may result in about 2600 deaths, 330 000 moderate to critical injuries, 240 000 minor injuries and 1.5 million instances of property damage in America per year.” Taylor et al suggest, “Further interventions aimed at decreasing mobile phone use among drivers should be considered” (Ric Bouvier 2003, Letter). Hussain et al (2010, 395-396) have considered the legal aspect mobile phone usage. It was found that after the ban on mobile its usage fell from 1.85 to 0.97% around Birmingham. McCartt et al (2003, 629-635) also informed of similar trends of short term effect of the law on drivers’ use of mobile phones as its use decreased greatly from 2.3% before the law to 1.1% in initial months after the law. David McD Taylor (2007, 432-434) has quoted McEvoy and Stevenson over the ambiguity between driver disability and accident risk. Any such inability on the part of the driver can affect the skills of the driver. The proof of connecting the mobile phone usage with accident should be dependable to decide the accurate reason of the accident. Usage of the experimental studies employing ways of mapping driving excellence in controlled scenario through limited parts of the task in the actual world is new. Epidemiological research has found greater risk of accident related with drivers’ use of cell phones (Laberge-Nadeau 2003, 649-651). 1.2 Statement of Research Question Research Objective: To measure the percentage rate of decline or increase in the use of mobile phone over a period of time. 2. Study Design Out of case-control design, cross-sectional design and cohort design for studying different issues based on observational study, cohort study design measures happenings in chronological order to differentiate between cause and effect. Our study design is based on cohort observational method of motor-vehicle drivers including three time slots (10:00–11:00; 14:00–15:00; 17:00–18:00) on three successive Tuesdays in October 2006 at 12 highway sites in metropolitan Melbourne. The design of the study will compare the rates of mobile use conducted in 2002 with the rates in 2011 to be organized within driver subgroups and at different highway locations and times. The purpose is to know the difference after a gap of 9 years on the same parameters of similar timings and locations, whether it has increased the rate of mobile phone use or decreased. The purpose is to know the difference of epidemiology of mobile phone use between 2002 and 2011; whether the rate of mobile phone use has increased in men in comparison to women in 2011 or it is same could be found by conducting another study on the same parameters used in 2002. The study is designed to know whether mobile phone use was more common in CBD, succeeded by metropolitan and freeway sites in 2011 as it was in 2002 or some different design was observed. The implemented study design is the best choice in comparison to any other design to measure the rate of increase or decrease of mobile phone use by observing the same city highways and during the same driving hours to reach perfect conclusions. As described in the research objective, the purpose could only be achieved by matching the results of all observations made in 2011 with 2002. 3. Methodology. 3.1 sample, method of recruitment An observational study sample would be taken of motorists in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia, during October 2011. For uniformity, the study design and methods would be similar to the earlier reported in 2002. The reason for selecting the Melbourne city in Australia is to compare the data analysis done in 2011 with the previous research analysis of 2002. The selection of the same city, its four metropolitan roads, four central business district (CBD) roads, and four freeway exit inclines has been made In brief, 12 locations would be used to observe four major metropolitan roads, four central business district (CBD) roads, and four freeway exit inclines. Data would be collected on three successive Tuesdays at precisely the same sites and by the same methods as gathered in 2002. Three observation sessions per day at each site (10:00–11:00, 14:00–15:00, and 17:00–18:00) would total 36 hours of observation. 3.2 Inclusion and exclusion criteria. Four research assistants would be assigned each one metropolitan road, one CBD road and one freeway exit ramp. All motor vehicles (except motorcycles), in the lane nearest to the edge only, would be capturd on the observer radars. The total number of vehicles, the number of drivers using a mobile, drivers’ sex and approximate age group would be taken into account. Mobile use would enter in records only when the research assistant has a clean shot of the mobile in the hands of driver. “Hands-free” mobile use will not be considered. Depending on the speed of the vehicles on that particular day, some vehicles could be stopping at lights; therefore, an extra 1-hour observation period could be added to assess inter-observer variability. 3.3 Outcome variable and how it will be assessed The sample size will remain the same as it was in the 2002 report. At least 2351 drivers in each of two variable subgroups (subgroups of driver type, highway site, and time) were examined to reach a “clinically significant” two-time rate difference in 2002. Data analysis furnished a total rate of mobile use and rates based on sex and age subgroup, highway location and time. New rates would report number of mobile users/1000 drivers with 95% CIs. Differences in rates between the subgroups would be calculated using the normal curve (z) test (level of significance, 0.05) and EpiCalc version 1.02 (Brixton Health, Llanidloes, UK) software. 3.4 The potential confounders in this study The number of drivers prone to accident risk from handheld mobile use while driving in Melbourne is expected not to remain same between 2002 and 2011. Although it could be a plus point if the aggregate rate comes down but it can not be a big leap of difference. One significant confounder could be over the possibility of more mobiles in the vehicles observed during the upcoming 2011 survey. Actually, sale of mobile phone handsets had reached eight million in Australia in 2005, more than double the number of mobile phones sold in 2002. There is every possibility of increased use of mobile in 2011 and the role of precautionary measures could be greater than what the figures indicate. The varying epidemiology of mobile use while driving is of value as in 2011 good number of men would be using mobiles while driving than women, a conclusion relevant with another Australian report. If any downfall in the rate of mobile phone use occurs in the evening time during 2011 and the restraint upward swing in morning use is observed, it could be hard to explain. Anyways, 2011 results should be consistent with that of another study in which the increased rate of use was seen during the morning. Such changes could be attributed because of the outcome of a difference in the type of the calls being made — for example, more business calls in the morning. 4 A detailed data collection method Qualitative aspects of research done by academics will be taken into consideration to derive conclusions. Qualitative research includes secondary research done by scholars. It is based on the primary research. There is sufficient qualitative and quantitative research available. Fresh research will be made on set quality parameters. As stated above four research assistants would be assigned to collect data from metropolitan road, CBD road and exit ramp. 4.1 Variables included Variables included are based on sex, age-group, highway location and time of day. Under ‘sex’ category, both males and females for the years 2002 and 2011 would be taken for analysis. During the observation time of 36 hours, percentage of drivers would be derived from the total number of examined drivers found using mobile phones. 4.2 Data Analysis Data analysis would be made by comparing the number of mobile phone users in 2002 with the number of drivers to be examined in 2011. The driver sub group would form both male drivers and female drivers for both the years at different highway locations and times. Data analysis would be made to find out any major change in the absolute number of drivers in 2011 as to what it was in 2002. Analysis would also cover whether due to any increase in traffic, the reduction in the rate of mobile use is affected or not. Further analysis will be made on the epidemiology of mobile use in 2011 to check whether it matches with 2002; whether the rate for men in 2011 is crucially greater than for women. In 2002, mobile use was most common in the CBD, succeeded by metropolitan and freeway locations. Analysis will be made on whether the same design remains in practice in 2011 even if the rate differences are crucially greater. The rate differences between the CBD and the metropolitan locations and between the CBD and freeway locations would be derived and compared with the previous rate differences. A comparison of data for use of mobile phone in the evenings will be carried out between 2002 and 2011 to confirm whether the same trend is being followed in 2011 or not. In other words whether the evening rate gets reduced significantly than the morning rate of mobile use and whether it is a little lesser than the afternoon rate. Further analysis will cover other variables like the impact of age on mobile use remains unaffected between 2002 and 2011 or not; whether in 2011, significantly lesser senior drivers use mobiles in comparison to both middle-aged drivers and younger drivers. The number of male and female drivers would also be examined. Greater variability was clearly observed in their evaluation of driver age. The number of drivers in the young, middle and older age groups ranged would be counted. To measure the difference in rates between the subgroups, calculated would be done using the normal curve (z) test (level of significance, 0.05) and EpiCalc version 1.02 (Brixton Health, Llanidloes, UK) software. 5. Ethical issues There are definitely ethical issues involved as previous research done by scholars has proved that use of mobile phone may result in about 2600 deaths, 330 000 moderate to critical injuries, 240 000 minor injuries and 1.5 million instances of property damage in America each year. In our research as no driver will be contacted and no recognizing data will be entered, ethical permission for such a cohort based design study is not asked for. On the other side, it is the ethical duty of vehicle drivers to think twice before using mobile phone while driving. Their conscience should inspire them not to play with the lives of others and their own while driving. Law should be followed earnestly although it has been seen that post-implementation of the law over the use of mobile phone gets reduced for a short period only. Figures tend to reach the pre-legislation level after or within a year. References Hussain, Khalid., Al-Shakarchi, Julien., Mahmoudi, Anys., Al-Mawlawi, Ali., Marshall, Tim. “Mobile Phones and Driving: A Follow-up.” Journal of Public Health 28 (2010): 395-396. Accessed October 9, 2010. http://jpubhealth.oxfordjournals.org/content/28/4/395/T1.expansion.html Laberge-Nadeau, C., Maag, U., Bellavance, F. “Wireless Telephones and the Risk of Road Crashes.” Accid Anal Prev 35 (2003):649–60. Accessed October 13, 2010. http://www.bmj.com McCartt, AT., Braver, E R., Geary L L. “Drivers’ Use of Handheld Cell Phones before and after New York State’s Cell Phone Law.” Prev Med 36 (2003): 629–35. Accessed October 13, 2010. http://ebscohost.com McCartt, A T and Geary, L L. “Longer Term Effects of New York State’s Law on Drivers Handheld Cell Phone Use.” Injury Prevention 10 (2004):11–15. Accessed October 9, 2010. doi: 10.1136. McEvoy, Suzanne P., Stevenson, Mark R., Woodward, Mark. “Phone Use and Crashes While Driving: A Representative Survey of Drivers in Two Australian States.” MJA 185 (2006): 630-634. Accessed October 6, 2010. http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/185_11_041206/mce10252_fm.html McEvoy, Suzanne P., Stevenson, Mark R., McCartt, Anne T., Woodward, Mark., Haworth, Claire., Palamara, Peter., Cercarell, Rina. “ Role of Mobile Phones in Motor Vehicle Crashes Resulting in Hospital Attendance: A Case-Crossover Study.” BMJ 331 (2005): 428. Accessed October 9, 2010. doi: 10.1136. McEvoy, Suzanne P. and Stevenson, Mark R. “Mobile Telephone Use among Melbourne Drivers: A Preventable Exposure to Injury Risk.” MJA 180 (2004): 43-45. Accessed October 9, 2010. http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/180_01_050104/letters_050104_fm-1.html. “Motorists 'flouting mobile ban,” BBC News, March 8 2004. Accessed October 9, 2010. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3541237.stm. Regan, Michael. “Preventing Traffic Accidents by Mobile Phone Users.” MJA 185 (2006): 628-629. Accessed October 6, 2010. www.mja.com.au/public/issues/185_11.../reg10958_fm.html. Ric Bouvier. “Mobile Telephone Use among Melbourne Drivers: A Preventable Exposure to Injury Risk.” MJA 180 (2004): 43-45. Accessed October 9, 2010. http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/180_01_050104/letters_050104_fm-1.html Taylor, David McD., E MacBean, Catherine., Das, Atandrila., Rosli, Reizal Mohd. “Handheld Mobile Telephone Use among Melbourne Drivers.” MJA 187 (2007): 432-434. Accessed October 9, 2010. www.mja.com.au/public/issues/187_08.../tay10293_fm.html Walker, Lesley., Williams, Jonathan., Jamrozik, Konrad. “Unsafe Driving Behaviour and Four Wheel Drive Vehicles: Observational Study.” BMJ (2006):1-3. Accessed October 9, 2010. doi:10.1136. Read More