Driver education and training are longstanding initiatives for novices to attain a driver license. More recently however, we demand more of such initiatives, expecting they can better prepare young novices to be safer in the early months and years of independent driving. In this chapter, we explore historical and current trends and evidence for these initiatives, both one-on-one and group-based initiatives, in the context of an established theoretical best-practice framework, the Goals for Driver Education. Beyond this, we highlight current lack of attention to driver education and training needs with current advances in driver support technologies in vehicles—both for novices but also experienced drivers. Moreover, we acknowledge the rapidly shifting climate of change towards increased vehicle automation and more livable cities. We argue the need to move beyond the current generalization that most driver education and training efforts are ineffective, to promote more nuanced successful approaches, and ways to best maximize the value of driver education and training to increase driver safety in a changing world.@en

This systematic review sought to assess older adult pedestrian injury severity, injury by anatomical location and incidence proportions, including comparisons to younger age groups when available and provide an analysis of the quality of the existing evidence. A structured search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycInfo, AMED, Web of Science, LILACS and TRID. STROBE was used to assess the reporting quality of the included studies. Random-effect model meta-analysis served to obtain pooled relative risk, incidence proportions and standardized mean differences for different outcomes due to pedestrian crashes comparing older and younger pedestrians, while meta-analyses could not be conducted for pedestrian falls. We screened 7460 records of which 60 studies (1,012,041 pedestrians) were included in the review. Injured pedestrians 60+ compared to those <60 were found to have a higher relative risk of severe injury (pooled relative risk RR 1.6, 95 % CI: 1.4–2.0 p < 0.001), critical care admission (pooled RR 1.5, 95 %CI: 1.3–1.8 p < 0.001), and fatality (pooled RR of 3.7, 95 % CI: 3.0–4.5 p < 0.001). Pedestrians 60+ also had higher incidence rates of pedestrian falls causing higher injury severity. GRADE was used to evaluate evidence quality, with the results suggesting that the overall quality of the evidence supporting these findings was low. Further research is needed to understand health risks associated with older pedestrian trauma and to develop effective risk management strategies.@en

Decades of research and development to address young drivers’ over-involvement in road crashes has led to critical improvements in understanding and interventions, yet has mostly focused on young drivers or their parents. Driving instructors have a key role in the young driver safety system, yet substantially less attention has been paid to their accreditation and professional development specific to teaching young drivers. Neurobiological development during mid-to-late adolescence influences how young people drive and the inflated risks they face relative to adult learners. In this paper, we discuss several of our research studies and supporting literature to argue that: (a) adept higher-order professional instruction can improve young driver safety behaviour in ways that can reduce crashes; (b) instructors are willing to be upskilled in young driver specific training needs; and (c) young drivers currently lack adequate training in new motor vehicle features that can enhance their safety, as do many adults, creating further demand on the driver-training industry. Given this body of work, we argue that the field has sufficiently progressed to know both why and how we should innovate and transform the driver training industry in ways that will improve young driver safety. However, we also note current developments appear to be working against rather than towards improvements. Therefore, there is a need to prioritise and implement change, and to harness advantages of emerging technologies. Professional development opportunities for driving instructors not only have potential to benefit the industry and young drivers, but also parents; therefore, boosting traffic safety culture across the community.@en

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) have shown substantial potential to increase road safety. To guarantee a growing presence and correct use of ADAS, road safety initiatives such as driver education and programs to promote safer vehicles need to be oriented towards the specific needs of individual drivers. The aim of this study was to explore a sample of Australian drivers’ rationale for driving a vehicle with ADAS and the strategies that they use when learning to operate the functions of ADAS. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 48 Australian drivers aged between 19 and 78 years (M = 41.54, SD = 16.32; 25 females). The results were organised into four themes: (i) reasons for driving/purchasing a car with ADAS, (ii) systems influencing driver purchasing systems, (iii) strategies used by drivers when learning about ADAS, and (iv) perceptions regarding the importance of learning and training to use ADAS. Acquisition of vehicles with ADAS frequently occurred because of the perceived safety benefits of specific systems (e.g., rear parking sensor or in-vehicle information system). Additionally, some participants did not highlight the safety benefits as the main reason for driving/purchasing a car with ADAS. Indeed, some participants mentioned that ADAS acquisition was not a reasoned process but rather an opportunistic decision when upgrading their vehicles, mainly because these systems were already included in a vehicle. Regarding education, it was found that participants were using trial-and-error as their main approach to learning about the capabilities of ADAS and official sources of knowledge about the system were rarely consulted. On a positive note, participants recognised the importance of learning to use ADAS systems correctly, showing that there is demand for effective and engaging driver education.@en

Introduction: Walking is a healthy, environmentally sustainable, and economically profitable transportation strategy for citizens and governments. Despite these benefits, it is also important to understand, and to inform health professionals, policymakers, and public infrastructure planners about, the preventable injury potential of walking in the transportation system and the distribution of injury by gender and age. This is especially important for non-vehicle pedestrian trauma, given that is more prevalent and there is less information available about its injury outcomes in comparison to pedestrian injury caused by vehicle collisions. Method: A retrospective cohort study, and cross-sectional bivariate and multivariate analyses of non-vehicle pedestrian trauma in the traffic environment (NVPTE) were conducted. Relative risks (RR) of the incidence of injury and prevalence of injury outcomes by age and gender were calculated using data collected by the Queensland Injury Surveillance Unit (QISU) in Australia. Results: Pedestrians aged 60+ have a consistently higher risk of NVPTE incidence when compared with pedestrians aged <60. Older pedestrians have a higher risk of injury to the pelvis (RR 10.3 95% CI 3.81–27.5 p < 0.0001) and hip (RR 5.59 95% CI 3.53–8.85 p < 0.0001), and an adjusted higher risk of hospital admission (RR 1.5 95% CI 1.30–1.64 p < 0.0001). Pedestrian males <60 had more injuries to the head, sprains, strains and open wounds compared with females <60, while those aged 60+ had lower risk of fractures and higher risk of hospital admission. Conclusion: Promoting walking for transport requires the incorporation of prevention strategies that consider key differences in injury outcomes. Clinical fall risk assessments and protective pedestrian infrastructure could play an important role in reducing the health and economic burden of pedestrian falls to the health system.@en

Youth education on risky behaviours, such as alcohol and drug use, has long moved beyond a ‘just say no’ abstinence-only approach. While emphasising that abstinence is safest, guidance is extended to harm reduction approaches, advocating safer ways to engage in the behaviour should the risk occur. In contrast, youth road safety education generally remains abstinence-only (e.g., don't speed, don't use your phone while driving). This manuscript presents arguments in support of the premise that is time to explore applications of harm reduction approaches to young driver education. While acknowledging this is not without risk, without further debate and research there is no evidence base to determine the true potential of road safety education to contribute to reductions in road trauma.@en

Empirical data demonstrates that distracted driving is a leading cause of crashes even in countries with sophisticated road safety systems. As such, a paradigm shift is needed to prevent driver distraction. This study aims to contribute to this paradigm shift by critically investigating the official distraction-related information and road rules for drivers in Australia, while gaining an understanding of how distraction is specifically addressed in these materials. Using a multistage content analysis, it was identified that official information focuses on three major categories including overview of distraction, sources of distraction, and prevention of distraction. The findings suggested ways that State Governments could improve the available information and road rules, as some of these materials were insufficient or ambiguous. For instance, several sources of distraction, particularly internal distractions (e.g., medical impairments) and external distractions (e.g., advertisement billboards) have been overlooked or received limited attention in the information. Additionally, the information does not address the specific needs of certain road users, such as young and inexperienced drivers. Further, the guidelines for safe interaction with certain in-vehicle distractions such as smartwatches, advanced driving assistance systems, and pets are insufficient or inconsistent across jurisdictions. The rules concerning some distraction types are ambiguous and contain uncertainties. Furthermore, general rules involving distracted driving such as those related to careless driving were found to lack specificity. The results of this investigation provide guidance for policymakers worldwide in developing road rules for distracted driving and the need to change the approach to a more holistic management of distractions.@en