Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between restraint use and death in rear-seated child passengers and to examine whether the estimated association varies by restraint type and age. DESIGN: Matched cohort study. SETTING: All reported crashed passenger vehicles with at least 2 rear-seated child passengers of whom at least 1 died from the US Fatality Analysis Reporting System for 1998 to 2006. PARTICIPANTS: Rear-seated child passengers aged 2 to 6 years. INTERVENTIONS: Three models of restraint use: (1) no restraint use, any restraint use; (2) no restraint use, recorded improper restraint use (including improper use of seat belts or child restraints, use of shoulder-only seat belts, and use of an unknown type of restraint), any other restraint use; and (3) no restraint use, improper restraint use, seat belts, and child restraints. Main Outcome Measure Death within 30 days of a crash. RESULTS: Compared with no restraint use, being restrained reduced the risk of death in rear-seated child passengers (relative risk [RR], 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.49). Compared with improper restraint use, any other restraint use reduced the risk of death (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.20-0.63). The RR of death for using child restraints compared with seat belts was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.57-1.14). Child restraints performed slightly better in fatality risk reduction in children aged 2 to 3 years (RR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09-0.33) than in children aged 4 to 6 years (RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11-0.44) compared with traveling unrestrained. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the protective effects of restraints for child passengers and highlights the importance of using restraints correctly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Du et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: