Journal of safety research · 2022
Convergent validity of vision based technology (VBT) among professional bus drivers.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shichrur Rachel, Ratzon Navah Z
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Due to the relative rarity of crashes, researchers use traffic offenses, police records, public complaints, and In-Vehicle Data Recorder (IVDR) data as proxies for assessing crash risk. In this study, a unique IVDR system, called Vision-Based Technology [(VBT), (Mobileye Inc.)] was used to monitor perilous naturalistic driving events, such as insufficient distance from other vehicles and pedestrian or bicycle rider near-misses. The study aimed to test the convergent validity of VBT as an indicator of crash involvement risk.
METHODS: Data from 61 professional drivers working for a large bus company were analyzed (16 of 77 in the original data cohort were excluded for insufficient VBT data). Data included: recorded VBT data, objective data collected from official records (crash records provided by the bus company, and public complaints of reckless driving), self-report data regarding crash involvement, and police tickets. The correlation between VBT, objective and self-reported data was analyzed. Binary-logistic regression modeling (BLM) was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) for participants involved in a car crash.
RESULTS: Correlations were found between the total VBT risk score and official crash records, public complaints, and self-reports of crash involvement. The BLM correctly classified 90% of those who were involved in a crash (sensitivity) and 60% of those who were "crash-free" (specificity). The VBT total risk score was the only significant contributing factor to crash risk, and for each point of increase, the odds of being involved in a crash increased by a factor of 1.55.
CONCLUSIONS: It is the first study to provide empirical evidence validating the VBT as an indicator of crash involvement and driver safety among professional bus drivers.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: VBT technology can provide researchers and clinicians a better understanding of bus drivers' risky driving behaviors- a valuable contribution to road safety interventions for this target group.
METHODS: Data from 61 professional drivers working for a large bus company were analyzed (16 of 77 in the original data cohort were excluded for insufficient VBT data). Data included: recorded VBT data, objective data collected from official records (crash records provided by the bus company, and public complaints of reckless driving), self-report data regarding crash involvement, and police tickets. The correlation between VBT, objective and self-reported data was analyzed. Binary-logistic regression modeling (BLM) was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) for participants involved in a car crash.
RESULTS: Correlations were found between the total VBT risk score and official crash records, public complaints, and self-reports of crash involvement. The BLM correctly classified 90% of those who were involved in a crash (sensitivity) and 60% of those who were "crash-free" (specificity). The VBT total risk score was the only significant contributing factor to crash risk, and for each point of increase, the odds of being involved in a crash increased by a factor of 1.55.
CONCLUSIONS: It is the first study to provide empirical evidence validating the VBT as an indicator of crash involvement and driver safety among professional bus drivers.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: VBT technology can provide researchers and clinicians a better understanding of bus drivers' risky driving behaviors- a valuable contribution to road safety interventions for this target group.