↓ Skip to main content

Pathways linking car transport for young adults and the public health in Northern Ireland: a qualitative study to inform the evaluation of graduated driver licensing

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pathways linking car transport for young adults and the public health in Northern Ireland: a qualitative study to inform the evaluation of graduated driver licensing
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4470-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Christie, Rebecca Steinbach, Judith Green, M. Patricia Mullan, Lindsay Prior

Abstract

Novice drivers are at relatively high risk of road traffic injury. There is good evidence that Graduated Driving Licensing (GDL) schemes reduce collisions rates, by reducing exposure to risk and by extending learning periods. Legislation for a proposed scheme in Northern Ireland was passed in 2016, providing an opportunity for future evaluation of the full public health impacts of a scheme in a European context within a natural experiment. This qualitative study was designed to inform the logic model for such an evaluation, and provide baseline qualitative data on the role of private cars in health and wellbeing. Nine group interviews with young people aged 16-23 (N = 43) and two group interviews with parents of young people (N = 8) were conducted in a range of settings in Northern Ireland in 2015. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis. Informal car-pooling within and beyond households led to routine expectations of lift provision and uptake. Experiences of risky driving situations were widespread. In rural areas, extensive use of farm vehicles for transport needs meant many learner drivers had both early driving experience and expectations that legislation may have to be locally adapted to meet social needs. Cars were used as a site for socialising, as well as essential means of transport. Alternative modes (public transport, walking and cycling) were held in low esteem, even where available. Recall of other transport-related public health messages and parents' existing use of GDL-type restrictions suggested GDL schemes were acceptable in principle. There was growing awareness and use of in-car technologies (telematics) used by insurance companies to reward good driving. Key issues to consider in evaluating the broader public health impact of GDL will include: changes in injury rates for licensed car occupants and other populations and modes; changes in exposure to risk in the licensed and general population; and impact on transport exclusion. We suggest an important pathway will be change in social norms around offering and accepting lifts and to risk-taking. The growing adoption of in-car telematics will have implications for future GDL programmes and for evaluation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Student > Master 9 13%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 14%
Engineering 8 11%
Psychology 8 11%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 27 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,068,665
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,135
of 14,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,662
of 317,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#185
of 254 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 254 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.