How to Read a Cell Phone Detraction Report

Persons using assistive technology might not exist able to fully access information in this file. For assistance, please send e-mail to: mmwrq@cdc.gov. Blazon 508 Accommodation and the title of the study in the subject line of eastward-mail service.

Mobile Device Use While Driving — United States and Seven European Countries, 2011

Route traffic crashes are a global public health problem, contributing to an estimated 1.three 1000000 deaths annually (ane). Known risk factors for route traffic crashes and related injuries and deaths include speed, booze, nonuse of restraints, and nonuse of helmets. More recently, driver distraction has become an emerging concern (two). To assess the prevalence of mobile device use while driving in Kingdom of belgium, France, Federal republic of germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Espana, the United Kingdom (United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland), and the United states, CDC analyzed data from the 2011 EuroPNStyles and HealthStyles surveys. Prevalence estimates for self-reported talking on a cell telephone while driving and reading or sending text or electronic mail messages while driving were calculated. This report describes the results of that analysis, which indicated that, amidst drivers ages 18–64 years, the prevalence of talking on a cell phone while driving at to the lowest degree once in the past 30 days ranged from 21% in the United kingdom to 69% in the United states of america, and the prevalence of drivers who had read or sent text or e-post letters while driving at least in one case in the past thirty days ranged from 15% in Kingdom of spain to 31% in Portugal and the United States. Lessons learned from successful route safety efforts aimed at reducing other risky driving behaviors, such as seat belt nonuse and alcohol-impaired driving, could be helpful to the United states and other countries in addressing this issue (2,three). Strategies such equally legislation combined with loftier-visibility enforcement and public education campaigns deserve further enquiry to make up one's mind their effectiveness in reducing mobile device employ while driving. Additionally, the office of emerging vehicle and mobile communication technologies in reducing distracted driving–related crashes should be explored.

HealthStyles and EuroPNStyles are online surveys designed by Porter Novelli (Washington, DC), a worldwide social marketing and public relations firm, and conducted among persons aged ≥eighteen years to examine health-related attitudes and behaviors. The HealthStyles data analyzed in this study were collected in the 2011 fall HealthStyles survey, conducted in the United States during September 30–October 5, 2011. The fall HealthStyles survey was sent to a random sample of panelists who had completed the 2011 bound HealthStyles survey. The spring HealthStyles survey was fatigued from a panel containing l,000 persons randomly selected through probability-based sampling to be representative of the noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population; 14,598 panelists were selected to participate in the jump HealthStyles survey, and 8,110 panelists completed the survey (response rate: 56%). The fall HealthStyles survey was sent to five,315 of the persons who had completed the spring HealthStyles survey; 3,696 (70%) completed the autumn HealthStyles survey. Respondents who completed the survey received advantage points (worth approximately $10) and were eligible to win a prize through a monthly sweepstakes (prizes generally were worth less than $500). HealthStyles survey information were weighted to friction match U.Due south. Electric current Population Survey proportions for the following ix characteristics: sex, age, annual household income, race/ethnicity, household size, education, U.S. Census region, metro status (i.e., residence in a metropolitan statistical area [MSA] versus a non-MSA), and prior Cyberspace access.

The EuroPNStyles survey was conducted in July 2011 in Belgium, France, Frg, kingdom of the netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and the UK. The sample was randomly fatigued from Synovate'south Global Opinion Panel, recruited via Synovate partnerships with select websites, portals, and Internet service providers in Belgium, France, Deutschland, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland. In Portugal, the sample was randomly drawn from the Global Market Insite's Console. Panelists were selected to match each country'southward census proportions for age and sexual activity, and quotas were set to reach 1,700 adults in all countries except for Spain and Portugal, where quotas were set up to 850 adults. The survey's response rate in 2011 was 34%, with ten,338 persons completing the survey. Respondents received advantage points for completing the survey, and the final data were weighted by age and sex to match each state'due south census proportions.

In both surveys, respondents were asked if they had driven in the past 30 days. If they had, respondents were and so asked, "In the past thirty days, how oftentimes have you talked on your cell telephone while you were driving?" and "In the past xxx days, how often have you lot read or sent a text message or electronic mail while you were driving?" Response choices were "never," "only in one case," "rarely," "fairly ofttimes," and "regularly." Weighted percentages and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for those who had talked on their cell phone while driving at least once (divers as those who responded "regularly," "fairly oftentimes," "rarely," or "just once") and for those who "never" talked on their cell phone while driving were calculated by country, historic period group, and sex. Similar percentages were calculated for reading or sending text or east-mail messages while driving. Additionally, weighted percentages of those who engaged in these behaviors "regularly" or "adequately often" were calculated and were included as a subset of those who engaged in these behaviors at least once in the past 30 days (Figures ane and ii).

In 2011, more two thirds (68.7% [CI = 66.4%–71.0%]) of U.S. adult drivers aged 18–64 years reported they had talked on their prison cell phone while driving at to the lowest degree in one case in the past thirty days (Figure ane). In Europe, percentages ranged from xx.5% in the Uk (CI = 17.7%–23.3%) to 59.4% in Portugal (CI = 54.half-dozen%–64.2%). Additionally, 31.ii% (CI = 29.0%–33.5%) of U.S. drivers aged 18–64 years reported that they had read or sent text or due east-mail messages while driving at least in one case in the past 30 days (Figure 2). In Europe, percentages ranged from xv.1% (CI = 12.3%–17.ix%) in Spain to 31.three% (CI = 27.0%–35.v%) in Portugal.

In the Us, few differences by sex were observed (Figure 3). A significantly larger per centum of both men and women aged 25–44 years reported talking on a jail cell phone while driving compared with those aged 55–64 years, and a significantly larger percentage of men and women aged 18–34 years reported that they had read or sent text or eastward-mail letters while driving compared with those aged 45–64 years.

Reported past

Rebecca B. Naumann, MSPH, Ann M. Dellinger, PhD, Div of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Command, CDC. Corresponding contributor: Rebecca B. Naumann, rnaumann@cdc.gov , 770-488-3922.

Editorial Note

This study provides new information on the prevalence of cocky-reported mobile device employ while driving in the The states and seven European countries. Although studies have estimated the prevalence of these behaviors in individual countries, question wording and methods vary, making comparisons difficult. This study used identical questions (with the exception of minor differences resulting from translation into multiple languages) and similar survey methods to examine differences in the prevalence of mobile device use while driving in the viii countries.

The estimates of talking on a cell phone while driving in the United States are consistent with previous enquiry (four–vi). In 2010, the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety conducted a nationally representative telephone survey and similarly found that 69% of drivers aged ≥16 years had used a cell telephone while driving, and 24% had texted while driving in the past 30 days (4). Like estimates too accept been reported from surveys carried out by the National Highway Traffic Rubber Administration and the Insurance Found for Highway Safety (v,half dozen). In Europe, recent national estimates of these behaviors are less common. Withal, a 2003 nationally representative survey in France institute that 33% of adults anile ≥18 years reported using a cell phone while driving, whereas the study described in this report indicated that approximately 40% of persons aged 18–64 years in France talk on their cell phones while driving (seven). The small difference might be explained past the increased use of cell phones over time and differences in the age groups surveyed.

Several studies support the finding that a greater proportion of younger drivers talk and text while driving compared with older drivers (v–vii). Strategies have been aimed specifically at teens and new drivers to try to reduce mobile device use while driving. As of February 2013, a total of 33 U.S. states and the District of Columbia had laws restricting at least some teens or new drivers from using electronic devices while driving. Nevertheless, these laws alone have non yet proven effective at decreasing these behaviors among immature drivers (8).

Additional strategies that have been applied to reduce mobile device employ while driving in the United States and other countries include police enforcement efforts, communications campaigns, vehicle and cell phone technological advances, legislation, and education (2). Evaluation data for many of these strategies is both lacking and needed. A few studies have examined the furnishings of cell phone use laws on the full general population and accept indicated that laws might be effective in decreasing sure types of prison cell phone use (e.thousand., manus-held use), particularly when combined with high-visibility enforcement by police officers (nine). However, these laws accept non nonetheless been shown to issue in decreased crash rates.

The findings in this report are bailiwick to several limitations. First, HealthStyles and EuroPNStyles survey respondents might non be representative of each of the eight country populations because the sampling approaches used were non completely random. However, comparisons of HealthStyles survey responses to those of the Behavioral Take a chance Gene Surveillance System, a survey which randomly selects persons through probability-based sampling, accept shown similar results for various health behavior and disease–related questions in the United States (10). Second, although the HealthStyles sample was non dependent on computer and Internet access (considering households that were selected to participate were provided with a laptop computer and admission to the Cyberspace if needed), this was not the case for the EuroPNStyles sample, which might bear on the representativeness of the estimates in these countries. 3rd, the findings might be subject to nonresponse bias. If nonresponders were significantly different than responders in their mobile device use while driving behaviors or likelihood of reporting such behaviors, results would be biased. Fourth, the findings might be subject to social-desirability bias; because mobile device utilise while driving is illegal in many of these countries and often viewed unfavorably, respondents might underreport this behavior, potentially resulting in low estimates. Fifth, considering the survey did not ask participants nigh cell phone ownership and cell phone capabilities (east.yard., texting capabilities), some of those responding "never" to these questions might include those that do not take a cell phone or practise not have texting capabilities. However, because this study covered persons aged eighteen–64 years in the United States and Europe, the percentage of those who do non own a prison cell phone would be expected to be pocket-size. Sixth, considering prevalence estimates are based on self-reported estimates of mobile device utilise while driving in the past 30 days, estimates might be affected past recall bias. Finally, this written report population was restricted to drivers aged 18–64 years; therefore, prevalence estimates are non representative of the entire driving population in these countries.

Mobile device utilise while driving is a prevalent behavior in the United states and several countries in Europe. This report revealed a large range in the prevalence of these behaviors, particularly for estimates of talking on a cell phone while driving. Information technology is unlikely that differences in the prevalence of mobile device use while driving betwixt countries are owing to differing proportions of persons owning mobile devices in these countries, given that mobile markets in adult countries are similarly saturated. It is besides unlikely that differences in cell telephone utilize laws fully explicate prevalence differences. While U.S. states differ in their cell phone utilize laws, nearly all European countries have hand-held bans in place, yet in that location is nevertheless a large variation in European estimates. Further research is needed to explore other factors that might help explicate these differences, such equally differences in strategies (e.chiliad., enforcement and public pedagogy campaigns) applied to endeavor to reduce these behaviors and cultural differences regarding the acceptability of these behaviors.

Many countries have made substantial improvements in reducing other risky driving behaviors, such as seat belt nonuse and alcohol-impaired driving, through a combination of legislation, sustained and highly visible enforcement, and ongoing public education campaigns to increase sensation of the risks and penalties associated with disobeying traffic laws (2,3). Countries could consider exploring the effectiveness of applying similar approaches to the trouble of mobile device use while driving. Additionally, the effectiveness of emerging vehicle and mobile communication technologies (e.thousand., advanced crash warning and commuter-monitoring technologies or applications that temporarily disable mobile devices while a vehicle is in motility) should be studied to assess their part in reducing crashes related to distracted driving.

References

1. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman M, et al. Global and regional bloodshed from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012;380:2095–128.
2. World Health Organization. Mobile phone use: a growing trouble of driver distraction. Geneva, Switzerland: Earth Wellness System; 2011. Available at http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/publications/road_traffic/distracted_driving_en.pdf.
3. Community Preventive Services Chore Force. Motor vehicle-related injury prevention. In: Guide to Customs Preventive Services. Atlanta, GA: Customs Preventive Services Task Force; 2012. Available at http://world wide web.thecommunityguide.org/mvoi/index.html.
4. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. 2010 traffic safety culture index. Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety; 2010. Available at https://world wide web.aaafoundation.org/2010-traffic-rubber-culture-index.
5. National Highway Traffic Safe Assistants. National phone survey on distracted driving attitudes and behaviors. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Condom Administration; 2011. Available at www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/811555.pdf.
6. Braitman KA, McCartt AT. National reported patterns of commuter cell phone use in the United States. Traffic Inj Prev 2010;11:543–48.
7. Brusque C, Alauzet A. Analysis of the individual factors affecting mobile phone use while driving in France: socio-demographic characteristics, car and phone use in professional person and private contexts. Accident Anal Prev 2008;forty:35–44.
8. Goodwin AH, O'Brien NP, Foss RD. Issue of North Carolina'southward restriction on teenage commuter cell phone utilise two years afterward implementation. Blow Anal Prev 2012;48:363–vii.
9. National Highway Traffic Safety Assistants. Four high-visibility enforcement sit-in waves in Connecticut and New York reduce hand-held phone employ. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Condom Administration; 2011. Available at http://www.distraction.gov/download/research-pdf/508-enquiry-notation-dot-hs-811-845.pdf.
10. Pollard WE. Use of consumer panel survey data for public health communication planning: an evaluation of survey results. In: Proceedings of the Section on Health Policy Statistics. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Clan; 2002:2720–4.

What is already known on this topic?

Route traffic crashes are a global public health problem, contributing to an estimated one.3 million deaths annually, and mobile device use while driving has become an emerging business.

What is added by this study?

In 2011, online surveys of drivers anile 18–64 years revealed that the percentage of those who reported that they had talked on their cell telephone while driving ranged from 21% in the Great britain to 69% in the The states, and the percentage of those who reported that they had read or sent text or e-mail messages while driving ranged from xv% in Spain to 31% in Portugal and the U.s.a..

What are the implications for public health do?

To address the problem of mobile device use while driving, countries could consider examining the utilise of road traffic injury prevention strategies (e.yard., legislation combined with loftier-visibility enforcement past police officers) that have been successful in reducing the prevalence of other route safety risk factors (due east.grand., alcohol-impaired driving and seat belt nonuse). Additionally, the effectiveness of emerging vehicle and mobile advice technologies should exist studied to appraise their role in reducing crashes related to distracted driving.

FIGURE 1. Weighted percentage of adults anile 18–64 years who reported that they had talked on their cell telephone while driving regularly or fairly often, at least in one case, or never in the past 30 days,* by land — HealthStyles and EuroPNStyles, 2011

* Respondents were asked, "In the by 30 days, how often accept yous talked on your jail cell phone while you were driving?" Response choices were "never," "merely in one case," "rarely," "adequately oft," and "regularly." Percentages of those who engaged "at least once" were defined as those who responded "merely in one case," "rarely," "adequately often," or "regularly." Percentages of those who responded "regularly" or "fairly ofttimes" are shown every bit a subset of "at least once."

Alternate Text: The figure higher up shows the weighted percentage of adults aged 18-64 years who reported that they had talked on their cell phone while driving regularly or fairly oft, at to the lowest degree in one case, or never in the past 30 days during 2011, by state, according to HealthStyles and EuroPNStyles. Respondents were asked, "In the past 30 days, how often have you talked on your cell phone while you were driving?" Response choices were "never," "just in one case," "rarely," "fairly often," and "regularly." Percentages of those who engaged "at to the lowest degree once" were defined as those who responded "merely once," "rarely," "fairly often," or "regularly." Percentages of those who responded "regularly" or "adequately oftentimes" are shown equally a subset of "at least once."

Effigy 2. Weighted pct of adults aged 18–64 years who reported that they had read or sent text or e-postal service messages while driving regularly or fairly often, at least once, or never in the past 30 days,* past country, HealthStyles and EuroPNStyles, 2011

* Respondents were asked, "In the by 30 days, how often take you read or sent a text message or e-mail while yous were driving?" Response choices were "never," "merely once," "rarely," "fairly oft," and "regularly." Percentages of those who engaged "at least in one case" were defined as those who responded "just once," "rarely," "fairly often," or "regularly." Percentages of those who responded "regularly" or "adequately oft" are shown equally a subset of "at least once."

Alternate Text: The figure higher up shows the weighted pct of adults anile xviii-64 years who reported that they had read or sent text or email messages while driving regularly or fairly oftentimes, at least once, or never in the past xxx days, during 2011, by state, according to HealthStyles and EuroPNStyles. Respondents were asked, "In the past xxx days, how frequently have you read or sent a text bulletin or email while you were driving?" Response choices were "never," "only once," "rarely," "fairly often," and "regularly." Percentages of those who engaged "at least once" were defined as those who responded "just once," "rarely," "fairly often," or "regularly." Percentages of those who responded "regularly" or "adequately often" are shown as a subset of "at least once."

Effigy 3. Weighted percentage of adults aged 18–64 years who reported that they had talked on their cell phone while driving at to the lowest degree in one case and read or sent text or e-mail letters while driving at to the lowest degree in one case in the past 30 days,* by sex and age group — United States, HealthStyles, 2011

* Respondents were asked, "In the past xxx days, how often accept yous talked on your cell phone while you were driving?" and "In the by 30 days, how oftentimes have you lot read or sent a text message or electronic mail while you were driving?" Response choices were "never," "simply once," "rarely," "fairly oftentimes," and "regularly." Percentages of those who engaged "at least once" were divers as those who responded "just once," "rarely," "fairly often," or "regularly."

Alternate Text: The figure above shows the weighted percentage of adults aged eighteen-64 years who reported that they had talked on their prison cell phone while driving at least once and read or sent text or east-mail messages while driving at least once in the past xxx days, by sex and age group in the U.s.a. during 2011, according to HealthStyles. Respondents were asked, "In the past 30 days, how oft have you talked on your jail cell phone while yous were driving?" and "In the by 30 days, how often have you read or sent a text bulletin or eastward-postal service while y'all were driving?" Response choices were "never," "merely once," "rarely," "adequately oftentimes," and "regularly." Percentages of those who engaged "at least one time" were defined equally those who responded "just once," "rarely," "adequately oft," or "regularly." In the United states of america, few differences by sex were observed.

Use of trade names and commercial sources is for identification only and does not imply endorsement past the U.S. Department of Health and Man Services.

References to non-CDC sites on the Net are provided as a service to MMWR readers and do not constitute or imply endorsement of these organizations or their programs past CDC or the U.Southward. Department of Health and Man Services. CDC is not responsible for the content of pages constitute at these sites. URL addresses listed in MMWR were current equally of the engagement of publication.

hubbardthencass.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6210a1.htm

Share this post