Safety-critical event risk associated with cell phone tasks as measured in naturalistic driving studies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of naturalistic driving studies involving estimates of safety-critical event risk associated with handheld device use while driving is described. Fifty-seven studies identified from targeted databases, journals and websites were reviewed in depth, and six were ultimately included. These six studies, published between 2006 and 2014, encompass seven sets of naturalistic driver data and describe original research that utilized naturalistic methods to assess the effects of distracting behaviors. Four studies involved non-commercial drivers of light vehicles and two studies involved commercial drivers of trucks and buses. Odds ratios quantifying safety-critical event (SCE) risk associated with talking, dialing, locating or answering, and texting or browsing were extracted. Stratified meta-analysis of pooled odds ratios was used to estimate SCE risk by distraction type; meta-regression was used to test for sources of heterogeneity. The results indicate that tasks that require drivers to take their eyes off the road, such as dialing, locating a phone and texting, increase SCE risk to a greater extent than tasks that do not require eyes off the road such as talking. Although talking on a handheld device did not increase SCE risk, further research is required to determine whether it indirectly influences SCE risk (e.g., by encouraging other cell phone activities). In addition, a number of study biases and quality issues of naturalistic driving studies are discussed.

[1]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Association between cellular-telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  N. Menachemi,et al.  Impact of texting laws on motor vehicular fatalities in the United States. , 2014, American journal of public health.

[3]  Jeff K Caird,et al.  A meta-analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[4]  Nir Menachemi,et al.  The impact of texting bans on motor vehicle crash-related hospitalizations. , 2015, American journal of public health.

[5]  T. Dingus,et al.  Distracted driving and risk of road crashes among novice and experienced drivers. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  S. Pocock,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[7]  Holger Rootzén,et al.  Accident Analysis and Prevention , 2013 .

[8]  Marco Dozza,et al.  Analysis of Naturalistic Driving Study Data: Safer Glances, Driver Inattention, and Crash Risk , 2014 .

[9]  Tatyana Shamliyan,et al.  Conducting quantitative synthesis when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[10]  Rune Elvik,et al.  Effects of Mobile Phone Use on Accident Risk , 2011 .

[11]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Evaluating the Relationship Between Near-Crashes and Crashes: Can Near-Crashes Serve as a Surrogate Safety Metric for Crashes? , 2010 .

[12]  Richard J. Hanowski,et al.  An Assessment of Commercial Motor Vehicle Driver Distraction Using Naturalistic Driving Data , 2012, Traffic injury prevention.

[13]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data , 2006 .

[14]  Richard J. Hanowski,et al.  Driver Distraction in Commercial Vehicle Operations , 2009 .

[15]  Anne T McCartt,et al.  Driver cellphone and texting bans in the United States: evidence of effectiveness. , 2014, Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference.

[16]  Richard J Hanowski,et al.  Comparing Handheld and Hands-free Cell Phone Usage Behaviors While Driving , 2014, Traffic injury prevention.

[17]  Rebecca L Olson,et al.  The Impact of Hand-Held and Hands-Free Cell Phone Use on Driving Performance and Safety-Critical Event Risk , 2013 .

[18]  Thomas A Dingus,et al.  Estimates of prevalence and risk associated with inattention and distraction based upon in situ naturalistic data. , 2014, Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference.

[19]  M. Woodward,et al.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of strategies for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[20]  L. Hedges,et al.  Introduction to Meta‐Analysis , 2009, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[21]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Phase II – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment , 2006 .

[22]  I. Olkin,et al.  Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology - A proposal for reporting , 2000 .

[23]  S. Pocock,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies , 2007, The Lancet.

[24]  Ronald R Knipling,et al.  Naturalistic Driving Events: No Harm, No Foul, No Validity , 2017 .

[25]  Jim P. Stimpson,et al.  Trends in fatalities from distracted driving in the United States, 1999 to 2008. , 2010, American journal of public health.

[26]  Matthias Egger,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[27]  Mark Asbridge,et al.  A meta-analysis of the effects of texting on driving. , 2014, Accident; analysis and prevention.