@article{ref1,
title="Validity across four common street-crossing distraction indicators to predict pedestrian safety",
journal="BMC public health",
year="2024",
author="Ning, Peishan and Xie, Cifu and Cheng, Peixia and Li, Li and Schwebel, David C. and Yang, Yang and He, Jieyi and Li, Jie and Hu, Guoqing",
volume="24",
number="1",
pages="e241-e241",
abstract="BACKGROUND: Multiple distraction indicators have been applied to measure street-crossing distraction but their validities in predicting pedestrian safety are poorly understood. <br><br>METHODS: Based on a video-based observational study, we compared the validity of four commonly used distraction indicators (total duration of distraction while crossing a street, proportion of distracted time over total street-crossing time, duration of the longest distraction time, and total number of distractions) in predicting three pedestrian safety outcomes (near-crash incidence, frequency of looking left and right, and speed crossing the street) across three types of distraction (mobile phone use, talking to other pedestrians, eating/drinking/smoking). Change in Harrell's C statistic was calculated to assess the validity of each distraction indicator based on multivariable regression models including only covariates and including both covariates and the distraction indicator. <br><br>RESULTS: Heterogeneous capacities in predicting the three safety outcomes across the four distraction indicators were observed: 1) duration of the longest distraction time was most predictive for the occurrence of near-crashes and looks left and right among pedestrians with all three types of distraction combined and talking with other pedestrians (Harrell's C statistic changes ranged from 0.0310 to 0.0335, P < 0.05), and for the occurrence of near-crashes for pedestrians involving mobile phone use (Harrell's C statistic change: 0.0053); 2) total duration of distraction was most predictive for speed crossing the street among pedestrians with the combination and each of the three types of distraction (Harrell's C statistic changes ranged from 0.0037 to 0.0111, P < 0.05), frequency of looking left and right among pedestrians distracted by mobile phone use (Harrell's C statistic change: 0.0115), and the occurrence of near-crash among pedestrians eating, drinking, or smoking (Harrell's C statistic change: 0.0119); and 3) the total number of distractions was the most predictive indicator of frequency of looking left and right among pedestrians eating, drinking, or smoking (Harrell's C statistic change: 0.0013). Sensitivity analyses showed the results were robust to change in grouping criteria of the four distraction indicators. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: Future research should consider the pedestrian safety outcomes and type of distractions to select the best distraction indicator.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1471-2458",
doi="10.1186/s12889-024-17756-y",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-17756-y"
}