A Preliminary Assessment of the Potential for Pedestrian Injury Reduction Through Vehicle Design

Ashton, S. J.

doi:10.4271/801315

Cited by 25 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Traffic safety reports that include pedestrian fatality risk curves most often cite the work of Anderson et al (1995), Ashton (1982, Pasanen (1992), 1 Teichgräber (1983), or Walz et al (1983. For example, the reports mentioned in the introduction were all based on one or several of these articles.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Rather surprisingly, we found that neither Ashton, nor Teichgräber, or Walz et al derived any risk curves in their articles. It is true that Ashton (1982) included fatality rates at different speed ranges from pedestrian accident investigations in Great Britain during the 1960s and 1970s. However, Ashton et al have specifically pointed out that, due to sample bias, these fatality rates did not give a fair description of the total population of accidents (Ashton et al, 1977;Ashton, 1982).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the analysis of Anderson et al was based on only 56 accidents with a substantial bias towards severe injuries (IWGAM, 1986), thus yielding crude and exaggerated risk estimates. Finally, Pasanen (1992) applied regression analysis to the biased data presented by Ashton (1982), which inevitably rendered his risk estimates too high (Davis, 2001).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was pointed out by Davis (2001) that the probable cause for the bias in the data presented by Ashton (1982) was the use of an outcome-based sampling scheme, meaning that the probability of an accident to be included in the sample depended on the injury severity of the accident. When outcome-based sampling is present, the data cannot be directly used to estimate fatality risks.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the data only included seven fatalities (and 101 survivors), thus making the results very approximate. Davis (2001) made use of the data presented by Ashton (1982) but tried to adjust for the bias by a weighting scheme, which was derived by comparing the distribution of pedestrian injury severities to national statistics. The results showed substantially lower fatality risks than those presented by Ashton (1982) and Pasanen (1992).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Pedestrian fatality risk as a function of car impact speed

Rosen

Sander

2009

Accident Analysis & Prevention

313

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Pedestrian fatality risk as a function of car impact speed

Rosen

Sander

2009

Accident Analysis & Prevention

313

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban Road Design and Keeping Down Speed

Corben¹

2022

The Vision Zero Handbook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter examines the opportunities available to a range of professions that directly or indirectly influence urban settings, to achieve Vision Zero safety outcomes. Starting with how we want our urban areas to be, the chapter examines options to eliminate the systemic risk of deaths and serious injuries on urban roads from three separate but related viewpoints; managing the threats to life and health posed by the energy embedded within the road transport system, the potential for crashes to occur and the exposure of those who use the system to severe injury risk from crashes. In urban settings, it is sometimes possible to eliminate or minimize vehicular traffic on selected roads and streets but, in general, it is either impractical or undesirable to do so. By physically separating vehicles from other vehicles, and from highly vulnerable road users, we risk creating the types of cities and towns that do not support our high level aspirations of highly liveable and healthy societies, with sustainable and equitable urban transport systems. Where physical separation is not viable, it becomes necessary to manage transport system energy to ensure risk remains below the levels we set for Vision Zero outcomes – no one being killed or seriously injured. The main focus of this chapter therefore is on the means by which we can manage kinetic energy, primarily through compatible combinations of infrastructure design and speed limit setting, to protect all who use urban roads. Vehicle technology and structural design are important considerations for system performance as a whole.

show abstract