Davies Gareth R, Roberts Ian
Int J Epidemiol. 2014 Oct;43(5):1615-23. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyu103.
Road traffic crashes are a major cause of death and injury worldwide and are set to increase as low- and middle-income countries motorize. United Nations (UN)and World Health Organization (WHO) road traffic injury prevention efforts depend on support from external organizations, many of which have commercial interests in increasing car use. Because of concerns about conflict of interest, this study objectively assessed the activities of a key WHO collaborator, the Global Road Safety Partnership (GRSP).
We conducted a quantitative content analysis comparing GRSP publications and the 2004 WHO World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention. Dictionaries of terms were constructed for each of the evidence-based interventions detailed in the World REPORT. Text analysis software was used to generate word frequency counts of those terms to compare the World Report and GRSP documents.
Education, information and publicity featured far more commonly in the GRSP publications than in the WHO World Report [word frequency ratios and 95% confidence intervals: GRSP Newsletter 3.09, 2.53 to 3.78; Around GRSPs World 4.69, 3.76 to 5.87;GRSP Project summaries 3.42, 2.59 to 4.51] On the other hand, compared with the World Report, reducing car use [GRSP Newsletter 0.36, 0.27 to 0.48], minimizing exposure to high-risk scenarios [GRSP Newsletter 0.04, 0.02 to 0.09] and encouraging the use of safer modes of travel [GRSP Newsletter 0.02, 0.01 to 0.08] rarely featured in GRSP publications.
The GRSP focuses on educational interventions, for which there is no evidence of effectiveness. Furthermore, the GRSP does not appear to consider the full range of WHO interventions. As motorization growth has serious negative implications for health, including those associated from physical inactivity, climate change and air and noise pollution, it is imperative that the UN and WHO do not allow business interests to dominate public health interests.
道路交通事故是全球死亡和受伤的主要原因，且随着低收入和中等收入国家的机动车化，这一情况还将加剧。联合国（UN）和世界卫生组织（WHO）预防道路交通伤害的工作依赖外部组织的支持，其中许多组织在增加汽车使用方面存在商业利益。出于对利益冲突的担忧，本研究客观评估了WHO的一个关键合作伙伴——全球道路安全伙伴关系（GRSP）的活动。
我们进行了定量内容分析，比较了GRSP的出版物与《2004年WHO全球道路交通事故预防报告》。针对《全球道路交通事故预防报告》中详细阐述的每项循证干预措施构建了术语词典。使用文本分析软件生成这些术语的词频计数，以比较《全球道路交通事故预防报告》和GRSP的文件。
教育、信息和宣传在GRSP出版物中出现的频率远高于WHO《全球道路交通事故预防报告》[词频比及95%置信区间：GRSP通讯3.09，2.53至3.78；《GRSP世界》4.69，3.76至5.87；GRSP项目摘要3.42，2.59至4.51]。另一方面，与《全球道路交通事故预防报告》相比，减少汽车使用[GRSP通讯0.36，0.27至0.48]、尽量减少暴露于高风险场景[GRSP通讯0.04，0.02至0.09]以及鼓励使用更安全的出行方式[GRSP通讯0.02，0.01至0.08]在GRSP出版物中很少出现。
GRSP专注于教育干预措施，而尚无证据表明这些措施有效。此外，GRSP似乎并未考虑WHO的所有干预措施。由于机动车化增长对健康有严重负面影响，包括与缺乏身体活动、气候变化以及空气和噪音污染相关的影响，联合国和WHO绝不能让商业利益凌驾于公共卫生利益之上。
