Dataset Information

Using Bluetooth beacon technology to reduce distracted pedestrian behaviour: a cross-over trial study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Over 6400 American pedestrians die annually, a figure that is currently increasing. One hypothesised reason for the increasing trend is the role of mobile technology in distracting both pedestrians and drivers. Scientists and policy-makers have attended somewhat to distracted driving, but attention to distracted pedestrian behaviour has lagged. We will evaluate Bluetooth beacon technology as a means to alert and warn pedestrians when they approach intersections, reminding them to attend to the traffic environment and cross streets safely.

Methods

Bluetooth beacons are small devices that broadcast information unidirectionally within a closed proximal network. We will place beacons at an intersection frequently trafficked by urban college students. From there, the beacons will transmit to an app installed on users' smartphones, signalling users to attend to their environment and cross the street safely. A cross-over trial will evaluate the app with 411 adults who frequently cross the target intersection on an urban university campus. We will monitor those participants' behaviour over three distinct time periods: (1) 3 weeks without the app being activated, (2) 3 weeks with the app activated and (3) 4 weeks without the app activated to assess retention of behaviour. Throughout the 10-week period, we will gather information to evaluate whether the intervention changes distracted pedestrian behaviour using a logistic regression to estimate the likelihood of key behavioural outcome measures and adjusting for any residual confounding. We also will test for changes in perceived risk. The trial will follow CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement guidelines, as modified for cross-over design studies.

Conclusion

If this program proves successful, it offers exciting implications for future testing and ultimately for broad distribution to reduce distracted pedestrian behavior. We discuss issues of feasibility, acceptability and scalability.

SUBMITTER: Schwebel DC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7245539 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivePedestrian-related death rates are increasing in the United States, partly due to increased use of distracting smartphones by pedestrians. Previous research documents high frequency of smartphone use while crossing streets near college campuses and in downtown business districts, but little is known about distracted pedestrian behavior in other urban environments. The current study used observational methods to examine and compare distracted pedestrian behavior in four urban areas - near an urban college campus, in a downtown commercial business district, near middle and high schools, and in entertainment districts - as well as examining whether the occurrence of distraction was associated with unsafe crossing behaviors.MethodsWe observed 112 intersections in 46 downtown, 30 school, 25 entertainment district, and 11 college campus-area intersections. Coders recorded distraction, crossing safety, pedestrian demographics, and traffic volume. Chi-square tests compared pedestrian characteristics by intersection type. Log binomial regressions estimated risk ratios (RRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between pedestrians walking alone and traffic volume with distracted crossing behavior, adjusting for age and gender. Similar models examined risk of unsafe crossing behavior by distraction behavior. All models were stratified by intersection type.ResultsDistraction incidence was highest in campus locations (52.9%) and lowest in entertainment districts (16.2%). Walking alone was associated with a 45% higher risk of distraction (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.30-1.62), although the increased association was limited to entertainment locations (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.25-2.08) and was significantly decreased in all other locations. Higher traffic volume was associated with lower risk of distraction in downtown locations (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.85) but higher distraction risk in entertainment locations (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.27-2.31). Associations between distraction and unsafe crossing behaviors were minimal.ConclusionDistracted pedestrian behavior occurs at different rates and in different circumstances, depending on the setting. These results offer valuable data to inform intervention programs that target appropriate populations in appropriate locations.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether advocacy targeted at local politicians leads to action to reduce the risk of pedestrian injury in deprived areas.DesignCluster randomised controlled trial.Setting239 electoral wards in 57 local authorities in England and Wales.Participants617 elected local politicians.InterventionsIntervention group politicians were provided with tailored information packs, including maps of casualty sites, numbers injured and a synopsis of effective interventions.Main outcome measures25-30 months post intervention, primary outcomes included: electoral ward level: percentage of road traffic calmed; proportion with new interventions; school level: percentage with 20 mph zones, Safe Routes to School, pedestrian training or road safety education; politician level: percentage lobbying for safety measures. Secondary outcomes included politicians' interest and involvement in injury prevention, and facilitators and barriers to implementation.ResultsPRIMARY OUTCOMES DID NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFER: % difference in traffic calming (0.07, 95%CI: -0.07 to 0.20); proportion of schools with 20 mph zones (RR 1.47, 95%CI: 0.93 to 2.32), Safe Routes to School (RR 1.34, 95%CI: 0.83 to 2.17), pedestrian training (RR 1.23, 95%CI: 0.95 to 1.61) or other safety education (RR 1.16, 95%CI: 0.97 to 1.39). Intervention group politicians reported greater interest in child injury prevention (RR 1.09, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.16), belief in potential to help prevent injuries (RR 1.36, 95%CI 1.16 to 1.61), particularly pedestrian safety (RR 1.55, 95%CI 1.19 to 2.03). 63% of intervention politicians reported supporting new pedestrian safety schemes. The majority found the advocacy information surprising, interesting, effectively presented, and could identify suitable local interventions.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of an innovative approach to translational public health by targeting local politicians in a randomised controlled trial. The intervention package was positively viewed and raised interest but changes in interventions were not statistically significance. Longer term supported advocacy may be needed.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN91381117.

Project description:BackgroundHigh levels of sedentary behaviour (SB) are associated with negative health consequences. Technology enhanced solutions such as mobile applications, activity monitors, prompting software, texts, emails and websites are being harnessed to reduce SB. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of such technology enhanced interventions aimed at reducing SB in healthy adults and to examine the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used.MethodsFive electronic databases were searched to identify randomised-controlled trials (RCTs), published up to June 2016. Interventions using computer, mobile or wearable technologies to facilitate a reduction in SB, using a measure of sedentary time as an outcome, were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and interventions were coded using the BCT Taxonomy (v1).ResultsMeta-analysis of 15/17 RCTs suggested that computer, mobile and wearable technology tools resulted in a mean reduction of -41.28 min per day (min/day) of sitting time (95% CI -60.99, -21.58, I2 = 77%, n = 1402), in favour of the intervention group at end point follow-up. The pooled effects showed mean reductions at short (≤ 3 months), medium (>3 to 6 months), and long-term follow-up (>6 months) of -42.42 min/day, -37.23 min/day and -1.65 min/day, respectively. Overall, 16/17 studies were deemed as having a high or unclear risk of bias, and 1/17 was judged to be at a low risk of bias. A total of 46 BCTs (14 unique) were coded for the computer, mobile and wearable components of the interventions. The most frequently coded were "prompts and cues", "self-monitoring of behaviour", "social support (unspecified)" and "goal setting (behaviour)".ConclusionInterventions using computer, mobile and wearable technologies can be effective in reducing SB. Effectiveness appeared most prominent in the short-term and lessened over time. A range of BCTs have been implemented in these interventions. Future studies need to improve reporting of BCTs within interventions and address the methodological flaws identified within the review through the use of more rigorously controlled study designs with longer-term follow-ups, objective measures of SB and the incorporation of strategies to reduce attrition.Trial registrationThe review protocol was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42016038187.