Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Co-design approach developed driving safety tools for parents, revealing strategies to manage fatigue effectively.
Introduction One Australian is killed every day in a fatigue-related driving incident. In the early years of parenthood, over 50% of parents report driving when highly fatigued. While fatigue management resources and campaigns exist for high-risk groups such as shiftworkers, there are currently no tailored educational resources to support new parents in managing fatigue-related driving risk. Methods A co-design approach was used to develop educational resources specifically for new parents. Parents of children aged under 5 years participated in co-design workshops aimed at exploring their experiences with fatigue and driving, evaluating potential risk-reduction strategies, and identifying effective communication formats. Data from the workshops were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis to inform content development. To assess the quality and impact of the co-design process, participants are completing the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (currently underway). Results 14 parents (6 Females; 8 Males) participated in 4 co-design workshops. A reflexive thematic analysis identified content for inclusion in the educational resources, including information about causes of fatigue, impacts of fatigue on driving, how to identify fatigue, fatigue risk reduction strategies, and strategies to support sleep while providing care for a child or children. These insights guided the creation of prototype educational materials, which were refined based on participant feedback. Discussion This study informed the development of targeted fatigue-related driving educational resources for parents including infographics and a website. The co-design process ensured the resources were relevant, practical, and grounded in lived experience. Final study results will inform future dissemination and implementation strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sprajcer et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: