Assessing the safety benefits of an advanced vehicular technology for protecting pedestrians

Oh, Cheol; Kang, Youn-Soo; Kim, Wonchul

doi:10.1016/j.aap.2007.10.010

Cited by 51 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, protecting pedestrians from traffic accidents is an important issue which draws great attention worldwide, and consequently many pedestrian protection methods have been proposed/developed, such as the air bag system (Song, 2009) and the integrated electronic security system (Chu, 2008). Extensive research has also been conducted on the effects of pedestrian-vehicle collisions on the human body (Cheol, 2008 andCui, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of microbus front structure on pedestrian head injury

et al. 2017

IJDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In order to study the effects of the microbus front structure on pedestrian head injury happened in pedestrian-microbus collisions, the mathematic models of the impact angle and microbus front configuration are developed, which illustrate the relationship between the impact angle, pedestrian size, and oblique angles of the engine hood and windscreen. The mathematic models are then verified by simulating experiments using LY-Dyna. The impact angle , which is measured between the contact surface and the pedestrian head's impact direction at the contact point, is an important parameter indicating the relationship of pedestrian head injury with the microbus front structure. The analysis and simulation results reveal that (1) in the case of collision with the windscreen, the pedestrian head injury increases while  increases; (2) in the case of collision with the engine hood, the pedestrian head incurs the most serious injury when  = 90 o , the pedestrian head injury increases while  increases when

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of microbus front structure on pedestrian head injury

et al. 2017

IJDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The former pertains to vehicular technology and involves systems of collision warning directed towards the driver. The latter, alternatively, is a technology applied during the occurrence of an accident (Cheol Oh, 2008).…”

Section: *Corresponding Author: Yusuf Idris Patrawalamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A description of the technology with evaluations of the technical performance, head impact characteristics and the overall performance of the technology is furnished from Lotta Jakobsson. Along with it, various other notable research to include suitable energy absorbers under the hood (Vesna Savic, 2014), the Active Hood Lift System (AHLS) (Cheol Oh, 2008) are studied, compared and the most suitable systems are combined to conceptually design the hood to absorb the upper body and head impacts to a certain extent before heading onto the external airbag. Also a combination of researches on designing of the bumper is studied replacing the standard energy absorbers with fibre reinforced epoxy composite and changing the shape to suite optimal energy absorbing capacities (M. M. Davoodi, 2007).…”

Section: *Corresponding Author: Yusuf Idris Patrawalamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The hood must absorb a significant amount of energy over a small area while precluding impact with a hard engine compartment component, but there is limited space between the hood and the critical components under the hood, such as engine cover or washer fluid bottle due to demanding sleek design of the modern vehicles (Cheol Oh, et al, 2008).…”

Section: Final Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When the head of the pedestrian strikes the hood of a vehicle, the severity of the head injury is described by the Head Injury Criterion (Cheol Oh, 2008) and the value is called HIC score, which is a threshold for head injury in vehicle collisions (Vesna Savic, 2014). Injury is unlikely for HIC scores below an established threshold, while the likelihood of injury is greatest for HIC scores above an established threshold.…”

Section: Head Injury Criterion (Hic)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of Pedestrian Safety Technologies for the New Age Car: A Review

2011

International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effectiveness of road safety interventions: An evidence and gap map

Goel,

Tiwari,

Varghese

et al. 2024

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRoad Traffic injuries (RTI) are among the top ten leading causes of death in the world resulting in 1.35 million deaths every year, about 93% of which occur in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Despite several global resolutions to reduce traffic injuries, they have continued to grow in many countries. Many high‐income countries have successfully reduced RTI by using a public health approach and implementing evidence‐based interventions. As many LMICs develop their highway infrastructure, adopting a similar scientific approach towards road safety is crucial. The evidence also needs to be evaluated to assess external validity because measures that have worked in high‐income countries may not translate equally well to other contexts. An evidence gap map for RTI is the first step towards understanding what evidence is available, from where, and the key gaps in knowledge.ObjectivesThe objective of this evidence gap map (EGM) is to identify existing evidence from all effectiveness studies and systematic reviews related to road safety interventions. In addition, the EGM identifies gaps in evidence where new primary studies and systematic reviews could add value. This will help direct future research and discussions based on systematic evidence towards the approaches and interventions which are most effective in the road safety sector. This could enable the generation of evidence for informing policy at global, regional or national levels.Search MethodsThe EGM includes systematic reviews and impact evaluations assessing the effect of interventions for RTI reported in academic databases, organization websites, and grey literature sources. The studies were searched up to December 2019.Selection CriteriaThe interventions were divided into five broad categories: (a) human factors (e.g., enforcement or road user education), (b) road design, infrastructure and traffic control, (c) legal and institutional framework, (d) post‐crash pre‐hospital care, and (e) vehicle factors (except car design for occupant protection) and protective devices. Included studies reported two primary outcomes: fatal crashes and non‐fatal injury crashes; and four intermediate outcomes: change in use of seat belts, change in use of helmets, change in speed, and change in alcohol/drug use. Studies were excluded if they did not report injury or fatality as one of the outcomes.Data Collection and AnalysisThe EGM is presented in the form of a matrix with two primary dimensions: interventions (rows) and outcomes (columns). Additional dimensions are country income groups, region, quality level for systematic reviews, type of study design used (e.g., case‐control), type of road user studied (e.g., pedestrian, cyclists), age groups, and road type. The EGM is available online where the matrix of interventions and outcomes can be filtered by one or more dimensions. The webpage includes a bibliography of the selected studies and titles and abstracts available for preview. Quality appraisal for systematic reviews was conducted using a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews, AMSTAR 2.Main ResultsThe EGM identified 1859 studies of which 322 were systematic reviews, 7 were protocol studies and 1530 were impact evaluations. Some studies included more than one intervention, outcome, study method, or study region. The studies were distributed among intervention categories as: human factors (n = 771), road design, infrastructure and traffic control (n = 661), legal and institutional framework (n = 424), post‐crash pre‐hospital care (n = 118) and vehicle factors and protective devices (n = 111). Fatal crashes as outcomes were reported in 1414 records and non‐fatal injury crashes in 1252 records. Among the four intermediate outcomes, speed was most commonly reported (n = 298) followed by alcohol (n = 206), use of seatbelts (n = 167), and use of helmets (n = 66). Ninety‐six percent of the studies were reported from high‐income countries (HIC), 4.5% from upper‐middle‐income countries, and only 1.4% from lower‐middle and low‐income countries. There were 25 systematic reviews of high quality, 4 of moderate quality, and 293 of low quality.Authors' ConclusionsThe EGM shows that the distribution of available road safety evidence is skewed across the world. A vast majority of the literature is from HICs. In contrast, only a small fraction of the literature reports on the many LMICs that are fast expanding their road infrastructure, experiencing rapid changes in traffic patterns, and witnessing growth in road injuries. This bias in literature explains why many interventions that are of high importance in the context of LMICs remain poorly studied. Besides, many interventions that have been tested only in HICs may not work equally effectively in LMICs. Another important finding was that a large majority of systematic reviews are of low quality. The scarcity of evidence on many important interventions and lack of good quality evidence‐synthesis have significant implications for future road safety research and practice in LMICs. The EGM presented here will help identify priority areas for researchers, while directing practitioners and policy makers towards proven interventions.

show abstract

Assessing the safety benefits of an advanced vehicular technology for protecting pedestrians

Cited by 51 publications

References 7 publications

Effects of microbus front structure on pedestrian head injury

Effects of microbus front structure on pedestrian head injury

Effectiveness of Pedestrian Safety Technologies for the New Age Car: A Review

Effectiveness of road safety interventions: An evidence and gap map

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About