Institute of Transport Economics, Gaustadalleen 21, Oslo NO-0349, Norway.
Accid Anal Prev. 2018 Apr;113:224-235. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.02.004. Epub 2018 Mar 7.
Interactions characterise the relationship between use of amphetamines, cannabis and opiates as a driver and the risk of traffic injury associated with the use of these drugs. Inverse risk curves have been found for these drugs, meaning that the higher the proportion of drivers in normal traffic testing positive for the drugs, the lower is the increase in risk associated with them. The inverse risk curves can arise in many ways. The paper discusses ten different interpretations of the curves; seven of these are methodological and claim that the risk curves are statistical artefacts. Some support for these interpretations is found; however, this does not rule out that substantive interpretations, proposing causal mechanisms underlying the curves may also be correct. Unfortunately, there is insufficient evidence to assess the support for the substantive interpretations. There is, accordingly, a large element of uncertainty about how the inverse risk curves arise and whether they can be modified.
安非他命、大麻和鸦片类药物的使用与交通伤害风险之间的关系以相互作用为特征，这些药物的使用与交通伤害风险有关。已经发现这些药物存在反向风险曲线，这意味着在正常交通测试中，检测出药物呈阳性的驾驶员比例越高，与这些药物相关的风险增加就越低。反向风险曲线可能以多种方式出现。本文讨论了这些曲线的十种不同解释；其中七种是方法性的，声称风险曲线是统计假象。这些解释中有一些得到了支持；然而，这并不排除实质性解释，即提出曲线背后的因果机制也可能是正确的。不幸的是，没有足够的证据来评估对实质性解释的支持。因此，对于反向风险曲线是如何产生的以及它们是否可以被改变，存在很大的不确定性。
