Analytic Framework [PDF - 2.85 MB] – see Figure 1 on page 49
When starting an effectiveness review, the systematic review team develops an analytic framework. The analytic framework illustrates how the intervention approach is thought to affect public health. It guides the search for evidence and may be used to summarize the evidence collected. The analytic framework often includes intermediate outcomes, potential effect modifiers, potential harms, and potential additional benefits.
Summary Evidence Table [PDF - 2.85 MB] – see Appendices 1 and 2, pages 61- 65
The number of studies and publications do not always correspond (e.g., a publication may include several studies or one study may be explained in several publications).
Campbell BJ. The association between enforcement and seat belt use. J Safety Res 1988;19:150–63.
Escobedo LG, Chorba TL, Remington PL, Anda RF, Sanderson L, Zaidi AA. The influence of safety belt laws on self-reported safety belt use in the United States. Accid Anal Prev 1992;24:643–53.
Evans WN, Graham JD. Risk reduction or risk compensation? The case of mandatory safety-belt use laws. J Risk Uncertainty 1991;4:61–73.
Fielding JE, Knight KK, Goetzel RZ. The impact of legislation on self-reported safety belt use in a working population. J Occup Med 1992;34:715–7.
Houston DJ, Richardson LE, Neeley GW. Legislating traffic safety: a pooled time series analysis. Soc Sci Q 1995;76:328–45.
Houston DJ, Richardson LE, Neeley GW. Mandatory seat belt laws in the states: a study of fatal and severe occupant injuries. Eval Rev 1996;20:146–59.
Lange JE, Voas RB. Nighttime observations of safety belt use: an evaluation of California’s primary law. Am J Public Health 1998;88:1718–20.
Preusser DF, Preusser CW. Evaluation of Louisiana’s safety belt law change to primary enforcement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1997. DOT HS 808 620.
Solomon MG, Nissen WJ. Evaluation of Maryland, Oklahoma, and the District of Columbia’s seat belt law change to primary enforcement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2000. DOT HS 809 213.
Ulmer RG, Preusser CW, Preusser DF, Cosgrove LA. Evaluation of California’s safety belt law change from secondary to primary enforcement. J Safety Res 1995;26:213–20.
Wagenaar AC, Maybee RG, Sullivan KP. Mandatory seat belt laws in eight states: a time-series evaluation. J Safety Res 1988;19:51–70.
Winnicki J. Safety belt use laws: evaluation of primary enforcement and other provisions. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1995. DOT HS 808 324.
The following outlines the search strategy used for reviews of these interventions to increase use of safety belts: Laws Mandating Use; Primary (vs. Secondary) Enforcement Laws; Enhanced Enforcement Programs.
The reviews of interventions to reduce motor vehicle-related injury reflect systematic searches of multiple databases as well as reviews of reference lists and consultations with experts in the field. The team searched six computerized databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Psychlit, Sociological Abstracts, EI Compendex, and Transportation Research Information Services [TRIS]), which yielded 10,958 titles and abstracts for articles, book chapters, reports, and published papers from the Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine proceedings about safety belts, alcohol-impaired driving or child passenger safety. Studies were eligible for inclusion if:
- They were published from the originating date of the database through June 2000 (March 1998 for child safety seat interventions)
- They involved primary studies, not guidelines or reviews
- They were published in English
- They were relevant to the interventions selected for review
- The evaluation included a comparison to an unexposed or less-exposed population
- The evaluation measured outcomes defined by the analytic framework for the intervention
Search Strategy for Use of Safety Belts:
(MOTOR(W)VEHICLE?) OR AUTOMOBILE? OR CAR OR CARS OR TRUCK? OR (TRAFFIC(2N)(ACCIDENT? OR CRASH? OR DEATH? OR FATALIT? OR INJUR?))
(SEAT(W)BELT?) OR SEATBELT? OR (SAFETY(W)RESTRAINT?) OR (SAFETY(W)BELT?) OR (OCCUPANT(W)RESTRAINT?) OR OCCUPANT(W)PROTECTION)
INTERVENTION? OR OUTREACH? OR PREVENTION OR (COMMUNITY(3N)(RELATION? OR PROGRAM? OR ACTION)) OR DETERRENT? OR PROGRAM? OR LEGISLATION? OR LAW? OR EDUCATION OR DETERRENCE OR COUNSELING OR CLASS OR CLASSES OR TRAINING OR PROMOTION? OR BEHAVIOR?
PEDESTRIAN? OR MOTORCYCLE OR BICYCL? OR CYCLIST? OR (SCHOOL(W)BUS?) OR BUS OR BUSES OR AIRPLANE? OR AIR(W)TRANSPORTATION?) OR AVIATION? OR (AIR(W)TRAFFIC) OR (AIR(W)CRAFT) OR DIAGNOSIS OR THERAPY OR GUIDELINE OR COMMENT? OR HISTORY OR EDITORIAL