University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, United States.
Chalmers University of Technology, Vehicle Safety Division, Gothenburg, Sweden; SAFER Vehicle and Traffic Safety Centre at Chalmers, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Accid Anal Prev. 2018 Aug;117:392-397. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.01.003. Epub 2018 Feb 23.
This study examined the hypotheses that passenger vehicles meeting European Union (EU) safety standards have similar crashworthiness to United States (US) -regulated vehicles in the US driving environment, and vice versa.
The first step involved identifying appropriate databases of US and EU crashes that include in-depth crash information, such as estimation of crash severity using Delta-V and injury outcome based on medical records. The next step was to harmonize variable definitions and sampling criteria so that the EU data could be combined and compared to the US data using the same or equivalent parameters. Logistic regression models of the risk of a Maximum injury according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale of 3 or greater, or fatality (MAIS3+F) in EU-regulated and US-regulated vehicles were constructed. The injury risk predictions of the EU model and the US model were each applied to both the US and EU standard crash populations. Frontal, near-side, and far-side crashes were analyzed together (termed "front/side crashes") and a separate model was developed for rollover crashes.
For the front/side model applied to the US standard population, the mean estimated risk for the US-vehicle model is 0.035 (sd = 0.012), and the mean estimated risk for the EU-vehicle model is 0.023 (sd = 0.016). When applied to the EU front/side population, the US model predicted a 0.065 risk (sd = 0.027), and the EU model predicted a 0.052 risk (sd = 0.025). For the rollover model applied to the US standard population, the US model predicted a risk of 0.071 (sd = 0.024), and the EU model predicted 0.128 risk (sd = 0.057). When applied to the EU rollover standard population, the US model predicted a 0.067 risk (sd = 0.024), and the EU model predicted 0.103 risk (sd = 0.040).
The results based on these methods indicate that EU vehicles most likely have a lower risk of MAIS3+F injury in front/side impacts, while US vehicles most likely have a lower risk of MAIS3+F injury in llroovers. These results should be interpreted with an understanding of the uncertainty of the estimates, the study limitations, and our recommendations for further study detailed in the report.
本研究检验了以下两个假设：在美驾驶环境下，符合欧盟（EU）安全标准的乘用车与符合美国（US）规定的车辆具有相似的耐撞性；反之亦然。
第一步是确定合适的美国和欧盟碰撞数据库，这些数据库包含详细的碰撞信息，例如使用 Delta-V 估计碰撞严重程度和基于病历的伤害结果。下一步是协调变量定义和抽样标准，以便使用相同或等效的参数合并和比较欧盟数据和美国数据。构建了符合欧盟规定和美国规定的车辆中根据伤害严重程度 3 级或更高级别（MAIS3+F）或死亡（MAIS3+F）的最大伤害风险（Maximum injury according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale of 3 or greater, or fatality，MAIS3+F）的逻辑回归模型。将欧盟模型和美国模型的伤害风险预测应用于美国和欧盟标准碰撞人群。将正面、近侧和远侧碰撞一起分析（称为“正面/侧面碰撞”），并为翻车碰撞开发了单独的模型。
对于应用于美国标准人群的正面/侧面模型，美国车辆模型的平均估计风险为 0.035（标准差=0.012），欧盟车辆模型的平均估计风险为 0.023（标准差=0.016）。当应用于欧盟正面/侧面人群时，美国模型预测的风险为 0.065（标准差=0.027），欧盟模型预测的风险为 0.052（标准差=0.025）。对于应用于美国标准人群的翻车模型，美国模型预测的风险为 0.071（标准差=0.024），欧盟模型预测的风险为 0.128（标准差=0.057）。当应用于欧盟翻车标准人群时，美国模型预测的风险为 0.067（标准差=0.024），欧盟模型预测的风险为 0.103（标准差=0.040）。
基于这些方法的结果表明，在正面/侧面碰撞中，欧盟车辆发生 MAIS3+F 伤害的风险很可能较低，而美国车辆在翻车事故中发生 MAIS3+F 伤害的风险很可能较低。在解释这些结果时，应考虑到估计值的不确定性、研究的局限性以及报告中详细说明的进一步研究建议。
