Journal article 817 views
The Advocacy for Pedestrian Safety Study: Cluster Randomised Trial Evaluating a Political Advocacy Approach to Reduce Pedestrian Injuries in Deprived Communities
PLoS ONE, Volume: 8, Issue: 4
Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.
To determine whether advocacy targeted at local politicians leads to action to reduce the risk of pedestrian injury in deprived areas.A Cluster randomised controlled trial in 239 electoral wards in 57 local authorities in England and Wales with 617 elected local politicians.Intervention group politi...
|Published in:||PLoS ONE|
Check full text
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
To determine whether advocacy targeted at local politicians leads to action to reduce the risk of pedestrian injury in deprived areas.A Cluster randomised controlled trial in 239 electoral wards in 57 local authorities in England and Wales with 617 elected local politicians.Intervention group politicians were provided with tailored information packs, including maps of casualty sites, numbers injured and a synopsis of effective interventions.25–30 months post intervention, primary outcomes included: electoral ward level: percentage of road traffic calmed; proportion with new interventions; school level: percentage with 20 mph zones, Safe Routes to School, pedestrian training or road safety education; politician level: percentage lobbying for safety measures. Secondary outcomes included politicians’ interest and involvement in injury prevention, and facilitators and barriers to implementation.Primary outcomes did not significantly differ: % difference in traffic calming (0.07, 95%CI: −0.07 to 0.20); proportion of schools with 20 mph zones (RR 1.47, 95%CI: 0.93 to 2.32), Safe Routes to School (RR 1.34, 95%CI: 0.83 to 2.17), pedestrian training (RR 1.23, 95%CI: 0.95 to 1.61) or other safety education (RR 1.16, 95%CI: 0.97 to 1.39). Intervention group politicians reported greater interest in child injury prevention (RR 1.09, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.16), belief in potential to help prevent injuries (RR 1.36, 95%CI 1.16 to 1.61), particularly pedestrian safety (RR 1.55, 95%CI 1.19 to 2.03). 63% of intervention politicians reported supporting new pedestrian safety schemes. The majority found the advocacy information surprising, interesting, effectively presented, and could identify suitable local interventions.This study demonstrates the feasibility of an innovative approach to translational public health by targeting local politicians in a randomised controlled trial. The intervention package was positively viewed and raised interest but changes in interventions were not statistically significance. Longer term supported advocacy may be needed.
Hills is the journal editor, not first author
Swansea University Medical School