This article reviews existing state laws related to autonomous vehicle (AV) safety, equity, and automobile insurance. Thirty states were identified with relevant legislation. Of these, most states had one or two relevant laws in place. Many of these laws were related to safety and insurance requirements. Data are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of these laws in order to guide further policy development.

BackgroundThe learner stage of graduated driver licensing (GDL), when teenagers are supervised by an adult driver, represents an opportunity to develop skills that could confer a safety benefit during their years of independent driving. This paper describes the design of a teenage driving study, which aims to evaluate the impact of a smartphone application, the ‘DrivingApp,’ to increase the quantity and improve the quality of supervised practice driving.MethodsThis longitudinal intervention study of teenage drivers and a parent/guardian spans the final 6 months of the learner licence and the first year of independent driving. Participants will be assigned to experimental or control groups using block allocation. Parent–teenage dyads assigned to the intervention arm will receive information about their practice driving via a smartphone application, including miles driven and total drive time. Baseline and monthly surveys will be administered to both experimental and control participants to measure the outcome measures during the learner stage: (1) practice driving amount, (2) consistency and (3) variety. Outcomes during independent driving are (1) self-reported number of attempts at the driving test and (2) number of crashes during the first year of independent driving.DiscussionImproving the quality of teenagers’ supervised practice driving is an unmet research need. This study will contribute to the evidence about what can be done during the learner period of GDL to maximise teenage drivers’ safety during the first years of independent driving, when crash risk is highest.

No abstract

ObjectivesTo identify, describe and critique state and local policies related to child passenger safety in for-hire motor vehicles including ridesharing and taxis.MethodsWe used standard legal research methods to collect policies governing the use of child restraint systems (CRS) in rideshare and taxi vehicles for all 50 states and the 50 largest cities in the USA. We abstracted the collected policies to determine whether the policy applies to specific vehicles, requires specific safety restraints in those vehicles, lists specific requirements for use of those safety restraints, seeks to enhance compliance and punishes noncompliance.ResultsAll 50 states have policies that require the use of CRS for children under a certain age, weight or height. Seven states exempt rideshare vehicles and 28 states exempt taxis from their CRS requirements. Twelve cities have relevant policies with eight requiring CRS in rideshare vehicles, but not taxis, and two cities requiring CRS use in both rideshare vehicles and taxis.ConclusionMost states require CRS use in rideshare vehicles, but not as many require CRS use in taxis. Though states describe penalties for drivers who fail to comply with CRS requirements, these penalties do not actually facilitate the use of CRS in rideshare or taxis. Furthermore, there is ambiguity in the laws about who is responsible for the provision and installation of the restraints. To prevent serious or fatal injuries in children, policy-makers should adopt policies that require, incentivise and facilitate the use of CRS in rideshare vehicles and taxis.