地理位置对美国公立高中生的交通风险行为有影响吗？

Does geographic location matter for transportation risk behaviors among U.S. public high school students?

作者信息

Shults Ruth A, Shaw Kate M, Yellman Merissa A, Jones Sherry Everett

机构信息

Division of Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway NE, Mailstop S106-9, Atlanta, GA, 30341, USA.

Division of Adolescent and School Health, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1660 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop US8-1, Atlanta, GA, 30329, USA.

出版信息

J Transp Health. 2021 Sep;22. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2021.101134.

DOI:10.1016/j.jth.2021.101134

PMID:35983498

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9380428/

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Teen motor vehicle crash fatality rates differ by geographic location. Studies assessing teen transportation risk behaviors by location are inconclusive. Therefore, we explored the role of census region and metropolitan status for driving prevalence and four transportation risk behaviors among U.S. public high school students.

METHODS

Data from 2015 and 2017 national Youth Risk Behavior Surveys were combined and analyzed. Multivariable models controlled for sex, age, race/ethnicity, grades in school, and school socioeconomic status.

RESULTS

Overall, 41% of students did not always wear a seat belt. Students attending schools in the Northeast were 40% likely than those in the Midwest to not always wear a seat belt. Among the 75% of students aged ≥16 years who had driven during the past 30 days, 47% texted/e-mailed while driving. Students in the Northeast were 20% likely than those in the Midwest to text/e-mail while driving, and students attending suburban or town schools were likely to text/e-mail while driving (20% and 30%, respectively) than students attending urban schools. Nineteen percent of students rode with a driver who had been drinking alcohol, and 7% of drivers aged ≥16 years drove when they had been drinking alcohol, with no significant differences by location for either alcohol-related behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

We found few differences in teen transportation risk behaviors by census region or metropolitan status. Age at licensure, time since licensure, driving experience, and the policy and physical driving environment might contribute more to variation in teen fatal crashes by location than differences in transportation risk behaviors. Regardless of location, teen transportation risk behaviors remain high. Future research could address developing effective strategies to reduce teen cell phone use while driving and enhancing community implementation of existing, effective strategies to improve seat belt use and reduce alcohol consumption and driving after drinking alcohol.

摘要

引言

青少年机动车碰撞死亡率因地理位置而异。评估不同地区青少年交通风险行为的研究尚无定论。因此，我们探讨了人口普查区域和大都市地位在美国公立高中学生驾驶普及率和四种交通风险行为中的作用。

方法

合并并分析了2015年和2017年全国青少年风险行为调查的数据。多变量模型控制了性别、年龄、种族/民族、在校年级和学校社会经济地位。

结果

总体而言，41%的学生并非总是系安全带。在东北部上学的学生比中西部的学生有40%的可能性并非总是系安全带。在过去30天内开车的16岁及以上学生中，47%在开车时发短信/电子邮件。东北部的学生比中西部的学生在开车时发短信/电子邮件的可能性高20%，就读于郊区或城镇学校的学生比就读于城市学校的学生在开车时发短信/电子邮件的可能性更高（分别为20%和30%）。19%的学生乘坐过饮酒司机驾驶的车辆，16岁及以上的司机中有7%在饮酒后开车，两种与酒精相关的行为在不同地区没有显著差异。

结论

我们发现按人口普查区域或大都市地位划分的青少年交通风险行为差异不大。获得驾照的年龄、获得驾照后的时间、驾驶经验以及政策和实际驾驶环境可能比交通风险行为的差异更能导致不同地区青少年致命撞车事故的差异。无论地理位置如何，青少年交通风险行为仍然很高。未来的研究可以致力于制定有效的策略来减少青少年开车时使用手机的行为，并加强社区对现有有效策略的实施，以提高安全带的使用率，减少酒精消费和酒后驾车行为。