Some states allow for drivers to use a cell phone mount but some states do not. These laws are widespread in other countries and are increasingly common in the United States. Ticket revenue often goes to state or local needs.
The authors expressed concern that misclassification of phone call and cell phone usage is due to reporting errors of the exact time of the collisions was a major source of bias with all case-crossover analysis of this issue.
The lack of appropriate controls and other challenges in conducting strong evaluations limited the findings of some studies.
A key finding was that: "No studies were found that directly address and resolve the issue of whether a causal relation exists between cellular telephone use while operating a motor vehicle and motor vehicle collisions.
Data from these states could be pooled because they were systematically collected, could be coded, and were fairly complete.
When the same data were reanalyzed using a Bayesian approach, the calculated RR of 0. The collection of citation data between states was not uniform and highly variable. The lack of appropriate controls and other challenges in conducting strong evaluations limited the findings of some studies.
This approach, for example, has led to increases in seat belt use [ Dinh-Zarr, Sleet, Shults, et al.
Conducting rigorous evaluations of highway safety laws can be challenging. Of distraction-related crashes, cell phone use may range from 1.
The questionnaire asked about driving habits, risk exposure, collisions over the past 24 months, socio-demographic information, and cell phone use. Ideally, information can be obtained to measure meaningful changes in the targeted behavior following implementation of the law and corresponding changes in crashes, injuries, or fatalities.