Young and novice driver intervention review Dr Shaun

Young and novice driver intervention review Dr Shaun Helman - January 2017 © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Contents 1 Background to the project 2 Method used 3 Findings 4 Discussion and recommendations © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Background © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Background § Newly qualified drivers of all ages experience an elevated risk of crashing their car within the first three years of passing their test (risk is even higher for those under the age of 25) § Proportionately higher accident rates of young and novice drivers compared with other groups are due to: § Lack of driving experience § Behaviours associated with elevated crash risk (e. g. poor perceptions of risks, hazards, drink driving, speeding) © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Background § Some interventions seek to reduce the risk through licensing systems that maximise maturity and on-road experience before full licensure (e. g. Graduated Driver Licensing approaches) § Some interventions take an alternative approach using a variety of methods (e. g. training, education, technology, support networks) in attempts to equip learners with skills, knowledge and attitudes they need to become a safer driver, or in an attempt to target specific risk factors at the behavioural level § This project focuses on the second type of intervention © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Project aims 1. To conduct an evidence base review, which builds on the existing evidence, helping to understand the effectiveness of pre- and post-test interventions, in terms of their ability to influence the attitudes and behaviours of young and novice drivers 2. To prioritise and shortlist those interventions that may have the greatest potential to reduce collision rates among this group © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Method © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Method overview Inception Evidence reviews Synthesis of the effectiveness of Synthesis of evidence linking ‘proxy’ measures such as those different pre- and post-test interventions covered in the first review Rate interventions Expert workshop Final report © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Review of evidence § Included interventions from the year 2000 § Initial search yielded 402 articles § List of abstracts were reviewed to establish potential relevance § 52 articles remaining after relevance scoring – these were scored for quality on the Adjusted Maryland Scientific Methods Scale (AMSMS) § List of proxy measures / risk factors pertinent to collision and injury risk in novice drivers was also developed from review of wider literature © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Desirable changes in risk factors targeted by interventions Less driving with peer age passengers, or fewer peer age passengers More seat belt wearing Higher hazard perception skill More supervised on -road experience pre- or post-test Less night time driving Lower speeds Less close following Reducing unsafe attitudes and behavioural intentions © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd Older age at licensure Lower levels of drink driving Less use of distracting devices when driving

Workshop § Purpose was to provide a mechanism by which interventions could be scrutinised by road safety professionals and stakeholders § Workshop did not consider evidence of effectiveness, instead it focused on a list of interventions and the practical issues associated with their potential implementation § Goal was to reduce the list of interventions to the three to five with the greatest potential on likely effectiveness and consideration of a range of characteristics that might influence larger scale implementation © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Criteria § § § § Acceptability Applicability Cost Ease of implementation Ownership Target audience Any other issues © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Workshop Attendees © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Findings © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Review findings § Almost all interventions are evaluated against non-collision or non-injury outcome measures § Even when collision or injury outcomes are included, sample sizes achieved are often insufficient to draw any firm conclusions § This made the consideration of risk factors targeted by interventions more important © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Review findings § Seven evidence-based interventions/intervention types were taken forward for discussion at the workshop § Three involved parental engagement, three involved the use of technologies to help promote behavioural change in pre-test and post-test phases, and one involved hazard perception training § Classroom education and behind-the-wheel training were also included for discussion at the workshop so that ease of implementation could be assessed against existing delivery capacity and provision © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Workshop findings § None of the interventions discussed were ‘ruled out’ § Most interventions were positively received and described as having key positive and negative aspects § Discussion focused on how the different potential interventions might be best built into the existing licensing process § Incentives were discussed in terms of being required to maximise market penetration if a voluntary (i. e. non-mandatory participation) approach is taken © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Discussion and recommendations © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Recommended interventions § Four interventions recommended for properly controlled scientific evaluation in a future trial in GB § Supported by a reasonable level of empirical evidence § Target risk factors that are plausibly important in contributing to collisions in newly qualified drivers, and use theoretically plausible mechanisms to achieve change § Seem feasible in terms of the practicalities of both an evaluation trial and subsequent roll-out © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

‘Short list’ of interventions 1 An intervention to engage parents in managing post-test driving in specific risky situations 2 An intervention to engage a range of stakeholders (utilising a logbook approach) in increasing the amount and breadth of pre-test on-road experience 3 An intervention utilising technology (in-vehicle data recorders or ‘telematics’) and possibly parents to manage driver behaviour post-test 4 An intervention to train hazard perception skill © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

1 An intervention to engage parents in managing post-test driving in specific risky situations § The one ‘of the shelf’ intervention which showed some promise is the ‘Checkpoints’ Programme § The programme helps parents to manage the risks faced in early licensed driving (e. g. driving at night, driving with peer-age passengers, driving in poor weather conditions) § A key component is the ‘parent-teen’ driving agreement that sets a number of restrictions that can be gradually ‘lifted’ § The programme can be delivered using online resources § The programme relies on a newly qualified driver having access to someone who can fulfil the ‘parent’ role. © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

2 An intervention to engage a range of stakeholders (utilising a logbook approach) in increasing the amount and breadth of pre-test on-road experience § This intervention is based on evidence that increased amounts and (and breadth) of on-road experience before licensure can decrease post-licence collision risk § Previous studies have suggested around 120 hours as a target § Buy-in from ADIs and the parent is critical § Support from the DVSA to provide a mechanism for logging practice will be required § The programme relies on a learner having access to a supervising driver © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

3 An intervention utilising technology (in-vehicle data recorders or ‘telematics’) and possibly parents to manage driver behaviour post-test § There are some questions around the consistency of driver ‘models’ that are used – a bespoke system may need to be developed for a trial § Some young drivers may not be comfortable having their driving tracked § There is an obvious potential link with the insurance industry in the form of ‘Pay As You Drive’ polices but there is likely to be some self-selection bias § The programme would rely on a ‘parent’ figure to oversee and respond to negative driving ‘events’ © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

4 An intervention to train hazard perception skill § The evidence base is fairly robust (its inclusion in the current test has suggested positive effects on collisions) § The delivery mechanism is relatively straightforward and understood by stakeholders § Given that it is an existing component of the test, it would be a less challenging intervention to ‘sell’ than some of the others being considered § A consideration is whether to make it compulsory or voluntary (possibly incentivised by insurance premiums) © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Evaluation and later implementation § Evaluate using a Randomised Control Trial design, and ideally using collisions as the outcome measure of interest § Trial design provides a robust appraisal to be made of the efficacy of each intervention, and permits causality to be inferred © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd

Do you have any questions? © Copyright 2016 TRL Ltd