2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0001-4575(00)00012-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The validity of self-reported seatbelt use: Hispanic and non-Hispanic drivers in El Paso

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
26
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly we found that selfreported seat-belt use was lower than in direct observations (62.4% versus 77.9%), whereas previous researchers found that self-reported seat-belt use was overestimated (25,26). This underestimation of seat-belt use in Tehran needs further investigation.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 78%
“…Interestingly we found that selfreported seat-belt use was lower than in direct observations (62.4% versus 77.9%), whereas previous researchers found that self-reported seat-belt use was overestimated (25,26). This underestimation of seat-belt use in Tehran needs further investigation.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 78%
“…This could affect the accuracy of the results. Many surveys depict significant differences between reported and observed safety belt use; however, the magnitude of the overreporting is still controversial (Parada et al 2001). Objective measures of the transportation behaviors could have enhanced the validity of the findings; for example, installing cameras on highways to monitor adherence to traffic laws and regulations such as obeying the speed limit and wearing a seat belt.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, some of this knowledge may be biased. Parada et al (2001) showed that estimates of safety belt usage among Hispanics based on selfreported information tend to be upwards biased. The lack of adequate racial/ethnic information in national archival traffic datasets, such as the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), has precluded the implementation of more comprehensive studies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%