Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Jim Langford

Publications and source records attributed to Jim Langford.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Older drivers do not have a high crash risk--a replication of low mileage bias.

The widespread claim that older drivers are overly involved in crashes has apparent support from crash data, especially when distance travelled is used as the exposure measure. However, independent of age, drivers travelling more kilometres will typically have lower crash rates per kilometre than those driving fewer kilometres. This paper uses Dutch travel survey data from a large sample of respondents to confirm previous research findings concerning the association between annual mileages driven and crash involvement. When the crash rates of drivers of different ages were compared after being matched for yearly driving distance, most drivers aged 75 years and above were indicatively safer than all other drivers. Only older drivers travelling less than 3000 km per year (just over 10% of all older drivers in the survey) gave any indication of elevated crash rates.

Accidents, Traffic↗
PubMed2006

Determining older driver crash responsibility from police and insurance data.

This study aimed to determine the extent to which older drivers can be considered responsible for their crashes, to identify key factors in those crashes for which older drivers have been judged responsible, and to assess the extent to which older drivers' extra crash responsibility contributes to the road toll. Insurance claims from the State of Tasmania, Australia, for 1998-2002 were linked with police records for crashes involving drivers aged either 41-55 years or 65 years or older. Insurance and police data sets contained independent judgments of crash responsibility. There was a high level of agreement between the two sets of judgments, with older drivers judged around 1.5 times more likely to be responsible for their crashes than middle-aged drivers and, conversely, older drivers were around 0.6 as likely to be absolved from crash responsibility. It was concluded that older drivers' additional crash responsibility while valuable in explaining "what went wrong," currently makes only a small contribution to the overall road toll.

Accidents, Traffic↗
PubMed2004

Some consequences of different older driver licensing procedures in Australia.

Given both the expected growth in the number of older drivers and their over-involvement in fatal and serious injury crashes, there has been a world-wide call for improved licensing procedures to manage older driver safety. In particular, licensing authorities have been urged to move from mandatory assessment of all older drivers to assessment practices targeting only those at higher crash risk. The current study examined older driver fatal and serious injury crash involvement rates across all Australian States to determine a possible association with the different licensing procedures. In particular, older driver crash involvement rates in Victoria (where there is no age-based assessment program) have been compared with rates in other jurisdictions with assessment programs. Crash involvement rates have been calculated using two denominators: per population and per number of licensed drivers. Some data limitations notwithstanding, older drivers in jurisdictions with age-based mandatory assessment programs could not be shown to be safer than drivers in Victoria. Further, there is some indicative evidence that older drivers in Victoria may have a significantly safer record regarding overall involvement in serious casualty crashes.

Accidents, Traffic↗
PubMed2004

Effectiveness of mandatory license testing for older drivers in reducing crash risk among urban older Australian drivers.

Most licensing jurisdictions in Australia maintain mandatory assessment programs targeting older drivers, whereby a driver reaching a specified age is required to prove his or her fitness to drive through medical assessment and/or on-road testing. Previous studies both in Australia and elsewhere have consistently failed to demonstrate that age-based mandatory assessment results in reduced crash involvement for older drivers. However studies that have based their results upon either per-population or per-driver crash rates fail to take into account possible differences in driving activity. Because some older people maintain their driving licenses but rarely if ever drive, the proportion of inactive license-holders might be higher in jurisdictions without mandatory assessment relative to jurisdictions with periodic license assessment, where inactive drivers may more readily either surrender or lose their licenses. The failure to control for possible differences in driving activity across jurisdictions may be disguising possible safety benefits associated with mandatory assessment. The current study compared the crash rates of drivers in Melbourne, Australia, where there is no mandatory assessment and Sydney, Australia, where there is regular mandatory assessment from 80 years of age onward. The crash rate comparisons were based on four exposure measures: per population, per licensed driver, per distance driven, and per time spent driving. Poisson regression analysis incorporating an offset to control for inter-jurisdictional road safety differences indicated that there was no difference in crash risk for older drivers based on population. However drivers aged 80 years and older in the Sydney region had statistically higher rates of casualty crash involvement than their Melbourne counterparts on a per license issued basis (RR: 1.15, 1.02-1.29, p=0.02) and time spent driving basis (RR: 1.19, 1.06-1.34, p=0.03). A similar trend was apparent based on distance travelled but was of borderline statistical significance (RR: 1.11, 0.99-1.25, p=0.07). Collectively, it can be inferred from these findings that mandatory license re-testing schemes of the type evaluated have no demonstrable road safety benefits overall. Further research to resolve this on-going policy debate is discussed and recommended.

Accidents, Traffic↗