Next Issue
Volume 2, December
Previous Issue
Volume 2, June
 
 
From the start of 2016, the journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers to identify articles. If you are required to add page numbers to a citation, you can do with using a colon in the format [article number]:1–[last page], e.g. 10:1–20.

Safety, Volume 2, Issue 3 (September 2016) – 4 articles

  • Issues are regarded as officially published after their release is announced to the table of contents alert mailing list.
  • You may sign up for e-mail alerts to receive table of contents of newly released issues.
  • PDF is the official format for papers published in both, html and pdf forms. To view the papers in pdf format, click on the "PDF Full-text" link, and use the free Adobe Reader to open them.
Order results
Result details
Section
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
135 KiB  
Correction
Correction: Pless, B. Risk Compensation: Revisited and Rebutted. Safety 2016, 2, 16
by Barry Pless
Safety 2016, 2(3), 19; https://doi.org/10.3390/safety2030019 - 21 Sep 2016
Viewed by 2885
Abstract
I regret that the following errors have been found in the published paper [1].[...] Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Return of Cycling—Safety Implications)
3176 KiB  
Article
Chores at Times of Fatal or Serious Injuries Associated with Tractor Overturns with and without Rollover Protection
by Henry P. Cole, Melvin L. Myers and Susan C. Westneat
Safety 2016, 2(3), 18; https://doi.org/10.3390/safety2030018 - 19 Sep 2016
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 5318
Abstract
This study describes chores when farmers were either fatally or seriously injured and required emergency medical treatment as a result of overturns of tractors with or without rollover protective structures (ROPS). Data from the 2002 Kentucky Farm Tractor Overturn Survey were used for [...] Read more.
This study describes chores when farmers were either fatally or seriously injured and required emergency medical treatment as a result of overturns of tractors with or without rollover protective structures (ROPS). Data from the 2002 Kentucky Farm Tractor Overturn Survey were used for this study. The data were collected by a telephone survey of a population-based random sample of 6063 (7.98%) of Kentucky’s 76,017 farm operators as listed in the Kentucky Agricultural Statistics Service database. Of farm operators interviewed, 551 (9.1%) reported 603 overturns and 5512 (90.9%) reported no overturns in the history of their farm, covering a period from 1925 to February 2002. Only the latest overturn was considered to improve recall accuracy. In addition, since the 1925 to 1959 time period had only 49 (8.1%) of the overturns reported, (14 farmers did not provide the year of most recent overturn); only data from the 1960 to 2002 period (approximately 41 years) were used. After making these adjustments, incidents evaluated included 25 cases (one fatal and four serious nonfatal injuries) that involved ROPS-equipped tractor overturns and 88 cases (24 fatal and 64 serious nonfatal injuries) that involved non-ROPS tractor overturns. Chores at highest risk for tractor overturns were identified for which educational and ROPS retrofit interventions could be emphasized. The highest frequency of overturn-related fatalities and nonfatal injuries were associated with hay harvesting, rotary mowing, and on-farm travel chores. These three chores represented 68.2% of fatal events and 50.0% of permanent and 56.6% of temporary disability overturn incidents. Tragically, in countries such as India and China with emerging mechanization, a large majority of tractors are produced without ROPS that can be expected to result in the same overturn-related epidemic of deaths experienced in highly mechanized countries, despite evidence of the protection provided by ROPS. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Agricultural Safety and Health)
Show Figures

Figure 1

5372 KiB  
Article
Mapping Bicycle Crash Risk Patterns on the Local Scale
by Martin Loidl, Gudrun Wallentin, Robin Wendel and Bernhard Zagel
Safety 2016, 2(3), 17; https://doi.org/10.3390/safety2030017 - 01 Sep 2016
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 7643
Abstract
Currently, mainly aggregated statistics are used for bicycle crash risk calculations. Thus, the understanding of spatial patterns at local scale levels remains vague. Using an agent-based flow model and a bicycle crash database covering 10 continuous years of observation allows us to calculate [...] Read more.
Currently, mainly aggregated statistics are used for bicycle crash risk calculations. Thus, the understanding of spatial patterns at local scale levels remains vague. Using an agent-based flow model and a bicycle crash database covering 10 continuous years of observation allows us to calculate and map the crash risk on various spatial scales for the city of Salzburg (Austria). In doing so, we directly account for the spatial heterogeneity of crash occurrences. Additionally, we provide a measure for the statistical robustness on the level of single reference units and consider modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP) effects in our analysis. This study is the first of its kind. The results facilitate a better understanding of spatial patterns of bicycle crash rates on the local scale. This is especially important for cities that strive to improve the safety situation for bicyclists in order to address prevailing safety concerns that keep people from using the bicycle as a utilitarian mode of (urban) transport. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Return of Cycling—Safety Implications)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

1136 KiB  
Commentary
Risk Compensation: Revisited and Rebutted
by Barry Pless
Safety 2016, 2(3), 16; https://doi.org/10.3390/safety2030016 - 29 Aug 2016
Cited by 23 | Viewed by 16528 | Correction
Abstract
This Commentary addresses the ongoing disagreements between many safety advocates who endorse traditional models of prevention and those who oppose them, arguing that safety measures are offset by risk compensation (RCT). The debate is especially heated with respect to regulatory or legislative prevention [...] Read more.
This Commentary addresses the ongoing disagreements between many safety advocates who endorse traditional models of prevention and those who oppose them, arguing that safety measures are offset by risk compensation (RCT). The debate is especially heated with respect to regulatory or legislative prevention measures. After explaining the rationale behind risk compensation (aka risk homeostasis theory) (RHT), I provide examples of RCT studies to explain why I believe they should be rejected. The main basis for my rebuttal, however, rests on data that show steady declines in unintentional injury mortality, which, according to RCT, should not have occurred. There are many other reasons for rejecting this theory, and it seems that the time has come for the debate to finally be concluded. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Return of Cycling—Safety Implications)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Previous Issue
Next Issue
Back to TopTop