确立酒精/药物使用与驾驶障碍之间关系的方法——流行病学、实验和实际案例研究之间的差异。

Q1 Social Sciences Forensic Science Review Pub Date : 2019-07-01
H Gjerde, J G Ramaekers, J G Mørland
{"title":"确立酒精/药物使用与驾驶障碍之间关系的方法——流行病学、实验和实际案例研究之间的差异。","authors":"H Gjerde,&nbsp;J G Ramaekers,&nbsp;J G Mørland","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Experimental, epidemiological, and real-case studies have different advantages and limitations when used to study the effect of substance use on the risk for involvement in a road traffic crash. It is easier to perform well-controlled experimental studies than well-controlled epidemiological studies due to difficulties related to selection bias, information bias, and confounding. On the other hand, it is difficult or impossible to perform experimental studies using single and repeated substance doses similar to those used by drivers and problematic drugs users. Real-case studies indicate which substances may cause observed impairment and involvement in road traffic crashes and at which concentrations; however, those studies cannot be used to quantify crash risks or determine causality. All three types of studies are needed to obtain a broad and complete picture as they may complement each other when assessing the effects of substance use on road traffic safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":38192,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science Review","volume":"31 2","pages":"141-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodologies for establishing the relationship between alcohol/drug use and driving impairment - Differences between epidemiological, experimental, and real-case studies.\",\"authors\":\"H Gjerde,&nbsp;J G Ramaekers,&nbsp;J G Mørland\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Experimental, epidemiological, and real-case studies have different advantages and limitations when used to study the effect of substance use on the risk for involvement in a road traffic crash. It is easier to perform well-controlled experimental studies than well-controlled epidemiological studies due to difficulties related to selection bias, information bias, and confounding. On the other hand, it is difficult or impossible to perform experimental studies using single and repeated substance doses similar to those used by drivers and problematic drugs users. Real-case studies indicate which substances may cause observed impairment and involvement in road traffic crashes and at which concentrations; however, those studies cannot be used to quantify crash risks or determine causality. All three types of studies are needed to obtain a broad and complete picture as they may complement each other when assessing the effects of substance use on road traffic safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic Science Review\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"141-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic Science Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实验研究、流行病学研究和实际案例研究在用于研究药物使用对参与道路交通碰撞风险的影响时具有不同的优势和局限性。由于与选择偏差、信息偏差和混淆相关的困难,进行控制良好的实验研究比控制良好的流行病学研究更容易。另一方面,很难或不可能使用类似于司机和有问题的吸毒者使用的单一和重复药物剂量进行实验性研究。实际案例研究表明,哪些物质可能造成观察到的损害和参与道路交通碰撞,以及达到何种浓度;然而,这些研究不能用于量化坠机风险或确定因果关系。所有三种类型的研究都需要获得广泛和完整的情况,因为它们在评估药物使用对道路交通安全的影响时可能相互补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Methodologies for establishing the relationship between alcohol/drug use and driving impairment - Differences between epidemiological, experimental, and real-case studies.

Experimental, epidemiological, and real-case studies have different advantages and limitations when used to study the effect of substance use on the risk for involvement in a road traffic crash. It is easier to perform well-controlled experimental studies than well-controlled epidemiological studies due to difficulties related to selection bias, information bias, and confounding. On the other hand, it is difficult or impossible to perform experimental studies using single and repeated substance doses similar to those used by drivers and problematic drugs users. Real-case studies indicate which substances may cause observed impairment and involvement in road traffic crashes and at which concentrations; however, those studies cannot be used to quantify crash risks or determine causality. All three types of studies are needed to obtain a broad and complete picture as they may complement each other when assessing the effects of substance use on road traffic safety.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forensic Science Review
Forensic Science Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊最新文献
Development and present status of impaired driving legislation in the United Kingdom. Fingerprints in ancient China - A mini-review. Forensic importance and advancements in microscopic examination of questioned documents. How Ontologies Have Supported Digital Forensics: Review and Recommendations. Scotch Whiskies and Forensic Examinations of Manufacturing-Derived Features for Their Authentication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1