Maryam Tavakkoli1,2*
Zahra Torkashvand-Khah3
Günther Fink1,2
Amirhossein Takian4
Nino Kuenzli1,2Don de Savigny1,2
Daniel Cobos Muñoz1,2- 1Epidemiology and Public Health Department, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH), Basel, Switzerland
- 2University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- 3National Institute for Medical Research Development, Tehran, Iran
- 4School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of road safety interventions in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), considering the principles of systems theory presented in the Global Plan for the Decade of Action for Road Safety.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched for original research studies published during 2011–2019 in the following databases: Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Global Health Library, ProQuest and TRID. We included studies conducted in LMICs, evaluating the effects of road traffic safety interventions and reporting health-related outcomes.
Results: Of 12,353 non-duplicate records, we included a total of 33 studies. Most interventions were related to legislation and enforcement (n = 18), leadership (n = 5) and speed management (n = 4). Overall, legislation and enforcement interventions appear to have the largest impact. Few studies were found for road infrastructure, vehicle safety standard and post crash response interventions.
Conclusion: Based on the currently available evidence, legislation and enforcement interventions appear most impactful in LMICs. However, many interventions remain understudied and more holistic approaches capturing the complexity of road transport systems seem desirable.
Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=197267, identifier CRD42020197267.
Introduction
With over 1.5 million deaths annually, road traffic injuries now account for the sixth highest cause of disability-adjusted life years lost globally (1). Road safety has become a major public health concern in many countries, resulting in increased attention from the international community. The United Nations integrated road safety into two of the 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs), SDG 3 and SDG 11 (2), and proclaimed 2011 to 2020 the Decade of Action for Road Safety (3).
Traditional approaches failed to capture the complexity of the road traffic systems. To address this, key principles of systems thinking were adopted in the UN Global Plan for the Decade of Action (3, 4). The plan provides an overall framework for countries to improve road safety (3) and is based on five pillars—road safety management, safer roads and mobility, safer vehicles, making road users safer, and improved post-crash response and hospital care—encouraging countries to pay more attention to vulnerable road users and shifting the responsibility of incidents from road users to the designers of the transport system (3).
Despite the increased global attention and progress in policy-making at national level, the number of road casualties increased in 87 low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) since 2013 (5, 6). LMICs bear more than 90% of deaths due to road traffic injuries, despite containing only 60% of the world’s motor vehicles. Death rates due to road traffic injuries in LMICs are three times higher than in high-income countries (HIC) (27.5 vs. 8.3 per 100,000 population) (6).
Even though findings about effective interventions from high-income countries (HIC) are potentially transferable to low resource settings, different context-specific factors such as costs, feasibility and barriers to implementation should be taken into account (7). Also, the traffic mix in LMICs is different than in HICs; the majority of evidence coming from HICs focuses on preventing injuries to vehicle occupants, but pedestrians and motorcyclists are the most vulnerable road users in LMIC settings (8).
During the past decade, few studies reviewed the effectiveness of road safety interventions in LMICs, however the results were limited to single interventions mostly in legislation and law enforcement category (9–11). A systematic understanding of interactions among different components of the system contributing to road safety is still lacking and very little is known about other road safety components, such as speed management, improving vehicle design, road infrastructure and post-crash response and their interactions in the system (12).
Following the end of the Decade of Action for Road Safety in 2020, we systematically reviewed the recent evidence on road safety interventions in LMICs. Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of road safety interventions in LMIC settings through the lens of the principles of the UN’s Global Plan for the Decade of Action.
Methods
Search Strategy and Selection Criteria
We conducted a systematic review and a narrative synthesis based on PRISMA guidelines as described in Supplementary Appendix A1 (13, 14). We included original research studies evaluating quantitative effects of road traffic safety interventions implemented in LMICs (5), reporting mortality, injury or crash as the primary outcome, online publication during January 2011–August 2019 in English, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Persian.
We used the World Bank income group classifications for fiscal year 2019, in which 138 LMICs are stratified by GNI per capita: low-income (under $1026), lower-middle income ($1026–$3,995) and upper middle-income ($3,996–$12,375) (5).
We developed a search strategy including terms to identify population, intervention, outcome and keywords using five pillars of the Global Plan as a framework (3). Then we used synonyms and variants of search terms to find relevant articles (15) in nine electronic databases including Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Global Health Library, ProQuest and Transport Research International Documentation (TRID). We tested our search strategy by checking the inclusion of ten relevant studies in the field in our Medline search; then we modified the search for other databases as shown in Supplementary Appendix A2 Database search and retrieval of results from each database were done in August 2019.
After importing references to EndNote X9, we followed seven steps of deduplication in EndNote recommended by Bramer et al. (16). Then study authors (MT and ZT) independently conducted screening of titles, abstracts and full texts. We recorded the reasons for exclusion of studies and resolved disagreements by discussion to reach a consensus, or deferred to a third author (DC) for the remaining cases. We registered the protocol for our systematic review in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020197267).
Data Synthesis
The primary outcome measures were crash, injury or mortality due to road traffic crashes. Two reviewers (MT and ZT) independently performed a risk of bias assessment of screened studies using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool (17). Any disagreement in this step was resolved by discussion to reach a consensus or deferred to a third author (DC) for the remaining cases (see Supplementary Appendix A3). In this step, we included controlled trial, case-control, cohort, quasi-experimental (interrupted times-series, before and after) study designs but excluded other study designs. In the next step, using a pre-defined data extraction form, two authors (MT and ZT) extracted variables of interest. We tested the data extraction tool with ten included model studies. Extracted variables are described in Supplementary Appendix A4. We classified interventions into seven categories using an adapted road safety intervention categories as defined in the WHO Save LIVES road safety technical package; see more details in Supplementary Appendix A5 (18).
The decision on the synthesis method was made after the risk of bias assessment to ensure that a sufficient number of studies were available reporting standardized metrics. Due to variability in statistical tests and different outcomes across studies, we decided to synthesize data using vote counting based on the direction of effect. We used a harvest plot to visualize the distribution of the evidence (19).
Results
The initial search retrieved 22,534 records. After deduplication, and screening for title-abstracts and full-text, using a predefined list of inclusion/exclusion criteria and assessment for risk of bias, 33 studies were included in the systematic review, of which 18 rated strong based on EPHPP quality appraisal tool as outlined in Figure 3 and Supplementary Appendix A3. Included studies were from 17 LMICs shown in Figures 1, 2. Twenty-seven studies were conducted in upper middle-income countries, four studies were conducted in lower middle-income countries, and two in low-income countries.
FIGURE 1. Study selection flow diagram. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, for Road safety interventions in low and-middle income countries, 2011–2019.
FIGURE 2. Geographical distribution of studies by type of road safety intervention in low and middle-income countries (systematic review, 2011–2019).
We organized the results around six categories by type of intervention as seen in Tables 1, 2. The categories with the most supporting evidence were enforcement and traffic laws, speed management, leadership (see harvest plot in Figure 3). Here we describe the range of effect in each category.
TABLE 1. Characteristics of included studies classified by the type of road safety intervention (systematic review, low and middle-income countries, 2011–2019).
TABLE 2. Summary of outcomes of road safety intervention (systematic review, low and middle-income countries, 2011–2019).
FIGURE 3. Summary of direction of health—related outcomes from included studies-harvest plot (systematic review, low and middle-income countries, 2011–2019). Distribution of the evidence for Six categories of interventions (Enforcement and traffic laws is presented with three subcategories) is plotted with the number of studies along the Y-axis. Each study is represented by a mark in each row for which that study had reported relevant results. Studies that rated STRONG using EPHPP quality appraisal tool are indicated with green bars, and studies rated MODERATE with yellow bars. The height of the bar indicates number of the studies.
Enforcement and Traffic Laws
We identified 18 studies in this category including interventions related to lowering blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limits, multifaceted road safety laws and mandatory use of safety equipment law.
Lowering BAC Limits
Of seven studies evaluating the effects of lowering BAC limits, four studies showed positive effects (see Figure 3). Brazil reduced the BAC limit for drivers and strengthened punishment by introducing the “Dry Law” (Lei Seca) in 2008. A 16% decrease in the number of mortality in Sao Paulo was reported 2 years after enactment of the Dry Law (20). However, looking at the trends of mortality rate, Volpe et al. found no significant change 5 years after enactment of the law (21). Despite the absence of any abrupt change in health-related outcomes, the law’s enforcement strengthened the pre-existing downward trends of mortality in some road users such as bicyclists and motorcyclists and pedestrians (22). Enabling effective enforcement of the law in 2012 led to a minor, yet steady decline in fatal crashes (23). Likewise, in China, enforcement of the criminal amendment for drinking and driving to the road safety law strengthened the pre-existing reduction trend in mortality and injuries (24, 25). Although enforcement of the law was better in cities, the reduction in years of life lost (YLL) was more evident in suburban areas (25). After enforcing the Life-Saving Law (“Ley Salvavidas”) in Mexico, a reduction was observed in the number of crashes as well as a downward trend in alcohol-related injury and mortality, but the authors could not find a strong association between the enforcement of the law and health-related outcomes (26).
Multifaceted Road Safety Laws
We found six studies evaluating the effects of multifaceted road safety laws, of which three showed positive effects (see Figure 3). In China, the road traffic safety law was enacted in 2003. Sheng et al. and Aney et al. found that while there was a reduction in the number of crashes and casualties, the law was more effective in preventing less severe crashes (27, 28). Similar results were observed in Mexico where a two-phase road safety initiative called IMESEVI—Iniciativa Mexicana de Seguridad Vial—was launched. Although there was no significant difference in injuries and mortality compared to the period preceding the implementation of the law, a reduction in the rate of crashes after the second phase of the intervention was reported (29). Enactment of the Brazilian Traffic Code in 1998 contributed to a reduction of 9.69 death per year from 1980 to 2014 with the highest decline among young adults (30). Similarly a multi-faceted road safety law in Ethiopia was followed by a rapid decrease of 19.2 and 12.4% in property-damage-only crashes and casualties respectively (31). And finally, in Botswana, a 30% levy on alcohol products complemented by the road traffic act contributed to a decrease in road traffic crashes and deaths, although the results were not sustained over time (32).
Taken together the results suggest that introducing a multifaceted road safety law was more effective on less severe crashes. However it is important to bear in mind this category includes various types of road traffic laws which impact health-related outcomes through different mechanisms, therefore results should be interpreted with caution.
Mandatory Use of Safety Equipment Laws
Four out of six studies in this category showed positive effects following the intervention (see Figure 3). In Serbia and Brazil, mandatory use of age-appropriate child restraints resulted in a reduction of injuries up to 8% among children (33, 34), but in Brazil the law had no effect on non-white children (34).
Two studies investigated the effects of a motorcycle helmet law on health outcomes—both emphasizing the diversity of outcomes among grographical and population subgroups. In Vietnam, law imposing severe penalties for offenders, resulted in a downward trend in potential years of life lost (PYLL) in 42 of the 61 provinces. Likewise, at national level a gradual reduction in PYLL (−18.1 per 100,000 person-months) was observed 6 months after the enactment of the law (35). In India, Gupta et al. studied the influence of the cultural setting that exempted women and Sikh men from wearing a helmet on road safety. Assessment of 224 male driver-female pillion crashes, revealed that women had lower compliance with the law (4.17% F, 61.8% M), and men had a 56 and 58% lower risk of deaths and serious head injury, compared to female counterparts (36).
Finally, in the case of seatbelt legislation we found one study from Iran. The results indicated with the increase of seatbelt use, a decline was observed in the severity of injuries in the first and second year after introducing the law (37).
Speed Management
We identified four studies evaluating the effects of speed management interventions, generally in favour of the interventions (see Figure 3). Establishing a new speed limit in Brazil strengthened the downward trend in the annual change in mortality after the intervention (38). Traffic-calming measures, another speed management intervention, mainly targeted safety of pedestrians. Two studies showed that transverse rumble strips and parallelogram-shaped pavements before pedestrian crosswalks are likely to reduce vehicle-pedestrian crash frequency by 25 and 21% respectively (39, 40). Likewise, the presence of speed tables, speed humps and speed bumps, was associated with a lower risk of pedestrian fatality (41). Meanwhile, fixed cameras detecting traffic violations in Colombia resulted in mixed effects: from a 57% increase in the total number of crashes and crashes with injury in the intervention group to a 5–6% reduction in the number of crashes (42, 43).
Leadership on Road Safety
We identified five studies evaluating the effects of education and public awareness interventions on road safety, four of which reported positive effects (see Figure 3). An initiative focusing on raising awareness among passengers and drivers of long-distance minibuses—Matatu in Kenya resulted in a 7.5 and 6% reduction in property-damage-only crashes and crashes with casualties respectively (44). Education initiatives were found to have minor to moderate effects on health-related outcomes. In China, an education initiative about bicycle safety for seventh-grade students reduced the incidence of bicycle injuries in children (45). Similarly, in Thailand, a safety-riding program targeting motorcyclists, reduced motorcycle-related injuries by 30% (46). Two studies from Uganda and South Africa showed that safety training and the provision of safe equipment through ride-sharing programs results in a reduction in crash risk (47, 48).
Survival After a Crash
We found two studies showing different results in this category (see Figure 3). In Iraq, the presence of prehospital trauma care was associated with an 8% deaths rate compared to 44% in absence of pre-hospital trauma care (49). In contrast, no significant change in the number of road traffic deaths was observed after the introduction of the central emergency medical service in India (50).
Infrastructure Design and Improvement
The most striking result to emerge from this category is the increase in the risk of pedestrian-vehicle collisions in presence of motionless green/red light signalization for pedestrian and vehicles. Whereas a negative association was found between police presence and the number of crashes in signalized intersections compared to non-signalized intersections (51).
Vehicle Safety Standards
We found only one study evaluating the effect of the antilock braking system (ABS). The results showed that vehicles with antilock braking system are less likely than vehicles with a conventional braking system to be involved in road traffic crashes due to brake failure (52).
Discussion
Our study aimed to systematically review the recent evidence on the effectiveness of road safety interventions in LMICs in light of principles of the Global Plan for the First Decade of Action for Road Safety. Eighteen out of 33 studies evaluated interventions in legislation and enforcement category, while some components of the road traffic system such as vehicle safety standards and road infrastructure and design were understudied. In most studies, only single interventions were assessed, omitting discussions around the complexity of road traffic system, relevant contextual factors, and its influence on the performance of interventions.
Our findings were in line with those of previous reviews, showing that most studies focused on changing road users’ behavior via enforcement, traffic laws, education and public awareness (9, 11, 53). Therefore, despite the recommendations of the Decade of Action to shift the burden of responsibility from road users to designers of the system, the role of designers in the system such as policy-makers, road managers, police, politicians, health sector, education system and etc. remained ignored (3). Our review exposes the scarcity of robust scientific evidence for some aspects of road safety—such as road infrastructure and design and vehicle safety standard—gaps that were revealed in previous literature and have remained unchanged after the Decade of Action (10, 11).
Another major finding of our review was that the existing scientific evidence in LMICs was focused on single interventions while little is known about the interaction between those interventions and components of the road transport system. This implies that the evidence around road safety is driven by component-oriented approaches while contextual factors are overlooked and road users are assumed to be the sole cause and changeable component in accidents (54). However a system is not merely a collection of single components (55) and road transport systems have characteristics of complex adaptive systems (56). In these systems, the relationships among the different components or stakeholders, emergent behaviours in the system, and contextual and historical factors are essential to improving performance (55, 57). In our review, single interventions were found to have short-term impacts, and their positive effect decreased over time. Salmon and Lenne argued that only focusing on one component of the system in isolation and ignoring other relevant factors will result in a diminished impact of the intervention (54). Furthermore, single interventions are less effective unless complemented with other interventions (58); Bambach et al, found that cumulative benefit of a combination of road safety interventions such as roadside barriers, helmet use, speed management and ban of alcohol consumption, resulted in synergies and a stronger positive effects (59).
Regarding evidence production, only 17 out of 138 LMICs were represented in our review. In line with previous literature, we found that a country’s income level was directly associated with representation in the production of scientific evidence: the number of studies from low-income and lower-middle-income countries was limited to 2 and 4 out of 33 studies respectively. These results reflect those of Perel et al. who also found that only 6 out of 236 road safety studies included in Cochrane systematic reviews were conducted in LMICs (60). Furthermore Zou et al. showed that among the top ten countries accounting for the production of 80.56% of road safety literature, only one LMIC—China—exists (61). This underrepresentation may partly be explained by factors related to the process of conducting research in LMICs and scientific publication systems (62). To measure the effectiveness of an intervention, researchers need information about characteristics of crashes, but many LMICs do not have a reliable information system recording this information (6). Another important factor affecting the conduct of research is the limited global funding opportunities for road safety. The available funding are donor driven and are dominated by HICs (63). The under-representation of LMICs in research publications goes beyond road safety research. In terms of the publication process, researchers in LMICs also face challenges. A review of the editorial boards of 27 global health journals showed that only 24% of editors were from LMICs and there was no editor-in-chief based in a low-income country (64). This lack of representation could be the result of institutional racism in publication process (65). In addition, authors from LMICs often cannot afford publication fees and consequently publish in journals that are not indexed in European or American (“global”) databases. This disparity leads to so-called “Academic-colonialism,” where the scientific publication system tends to empower researchers from HICs (66).
Finally, as mentioned before, the Global Plan for the Decade of Action encourages countries to set priorities for vulnerable road users—pedestrians, cyclists and motorized two and three-wheelers—accounting for half of the road traffic deaths globally (67). These users mostly benefit from speed management, alcohol control and enhanced visibility measures (68). In our review, we found 16 studies evaluating interventions such as lowering BAC limit, traffic calming measures, traffic signals and mandatory helmet law directly target vulnerable road users. However, we did not find studies evaluating the impact of proven effective interventions such as alcohol ignition interlock (69), street lighting (70), conspicuity aids and separate bicycle lanes (71) for vulnerable road users.
Selecting LMICs as the population for this review was both a strength and limitation of our study. We acknowledge that LMICs are very diverse in terms of resources and other contextual factors that might affect the subject of this study, however we used this term for general characteristics of countries in these income levels and to highlight the gaps in the literature among these contexts.
Conclusion
Our study has shown the lack of a systems lens in evaluating road safety interventions in LMICs. We found that the same components of the system are often studied in isolation and little is known about the interactions between different components at a systemic level. The majority of the interventions are trying to change road users’ behaviour with education, legislation and enforcement and there is very little focus on eliminating hazards from the road system. A holistic understanding of the road transport system requires shifting from the prevailing paradigm of “fix the road user” to the systems thinking approach to “fix the system” while accounting for synergies and interactions among system components. A prerequisite in the application of systems approach in road transport systems research and practice is the availability of a good quality crash data system. This entails collaborating with relevant stakeholders and taking steps to improve road safety data systems. Until countries have a strong information system to collect various crash characteristics, the integration of the different information systems and using methodological approaches accounting for missing data will be essential. We are currently investigating ways of improving road traffic death registration systems in LMICs using systems thinking approaches such as process mapping and modelling, social network analysis (72).
Addressing the evidence gap in scientific publications from lower-income countries is a long-term but necessary process. It requires capacity strengthening by creating research networks that reach also into LMICs. The scientific community needs to give more visibility to evidence from LICs led by local scientists, by providing funding opportunities and facilitating publication processes to collect good quality evidence.
With the beginning of the second Decade of Action for Road Safety in 2021, we expect our findings to be valuable for informing global and national efforts towards designing inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable societies, as well as the comprehensive research agenda needed to support such practice. In light of our findings, we recommend taking a step further from component-oriented approaches to applying systemic approached including systems thinking approaches in research and practice. This entails efforts to study complexity of the system as a whole and identifying international, regional and local actors and processes to improve accountability for improving road safety in LMICs.
Author Contributions
MT and DC designed the study protocol and developed the search strategy. MT and ZT-K conducted screening and data extraction. All authors contributed to the synthesis of results and writing and editing drafts. MT wrote the first draft and all authors reviewed and provided inputs for subsequent drafts. All authors prepared and approved the final article.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the support from Swiss Government Excellence Scholarships for Foreign Scholars and the SSPH + Global PhD Fellowship Program in Public Health Sciences funded by Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (Horizon 2020—COFUND).
Supplementary Material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.ssph-journal.org/articles/10.3389/phrs.2022.1604499/full#supplementary-material
References
1.Global Health Estimates. Life Expectancy and Leading Causes of Death and Disability World Health Organization (2020). Available at: https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/mortality-and-global-health-estimates.
2.UNO. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations Organization (2015). Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld.
3.WHO. Global Plan for the Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011-2020. Geneva: World Health Organization (2011). Available at: https://www.who.int/roadsafety/decade_of_action/en/.
4. Naumann, RB, Sandt, L, Kumfer, W, LaJeunesse, S, Heiny, S, and Lich, KH. Systems Thinking in the Context of Road Safety: Can Systems Tools Help Us Realize a True “Safe Systems” Approach?. Curr Epidemiol Rep (2020) 7(4):343–51. doi:10.1007/s40471-020-00248-z
5.World Bank. World Bank Country and Lending Groups €“ World Bank Data Help Desk (2021). Available at: https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups.
7. Wegman, F. The Future of Road Safety: A Worldwide Perspective. IATSS Res (2017) 40(2):66–71. doi:10.1016/j.iatssr.2016.05.003
8. Evaniew, N, Godin, K, Schemitsch, EH, and Bhandari, M. Evidence Gaps in the Global Decade of Road Traffic Safety. J orthopaedic Trauma (2014) 28:S15–S17. doi:10.1097/bot.0000000000000103
9. Banstola, A, and Mytton, J. Cost-effectiveness of Interventions to Prevent Road Traffic Injuries in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Literature Review. Traffic Inj Prev (2017) 18(4):357–62. doi:10.1080/15389588.2016.1212165
10. Staton, C, Vissoci, J, Gong, E, Toomey, N, Wafula, R, Abdelgadir, J, et al. Road Traffic Injury Prevention Initiatives: a Systematic Review and Metasummary of Effectiveness in Low and Middle Income Countries. PLoS One (2016) 11(1):e0144971. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144971
11. Vecino-Ortiz, AI, Jafri, A, and Hyder, AA. Effective Interventions for Unintentional Injuries: a Systematic Review and Mortality Impact Assessment Among the Poorest Billion. Lancet Glob Health (2018) 6(5):e523–e534. doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(18)30107-4
12. Bunn, F, Collier, T, Frost, C, Ker, K, Roberts, I, and Wentz, R. Traffic Calming for the Prevention of Road Traffic Injuries: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Inj Prev (2003) 9(3):200–4. doi:10.1136/ip.9.3.200
13. Page, MJ, Moher, D, Bossuyt, PM, Boutron, I, Hoffmann, TC, Mulrow, CD, et al. PRISMA 2020 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated Guidance and Exemplars for Reporting Systematic Reviews. bmj (2021) 372:n160. doi:10.1136/bmj.n160
14. Page, MJ, McKenzie, JE, Bossuyt, PM, Boutron, I, Hoffmann, TC, Mulrow, CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: an Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. Bmj (2021) 372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71
15. Lefebvre, C, Glanville, J, Briscoe, S, Littlewood, A, Marshall, C, Metzendorf, MI, et al. Searching for and Selecting Studies. In: JPT Higgins, J Thomas, J Chandler, M Cumpston, TLi, and MJ Page, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Second Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: Wiley Online Library (2019). p. 67–107. doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch4
16. Bramer, WM, Giustini, D, de Jonge, GB, Holland, L, and Bekhuis, T. De-duplication of Database Search Results for Systematic Reviews in EndNote. J Med Libr Assoc (2016) 104(3):240–3. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.014
17. Thomas, H, Ciliska, D, Micucci, S, Wilson‐ABra, J, and Dobbins, M. Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) (1999). Available at: https://www.ephpp.ca/PDF/Quality%20Assessment%20Tool_2010_2.pdf.
18.WHO. Save Lives: A Road Safety Technical Package (2017). Available at: https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/mortality-and-global-health-estimates.
19. McKenzie, JE, and Brennan, SE. Chapter 12: Synthesizing and Presenting Findings Using Other Methods. In: JPT Higgins, J Thomas, J Chandler, M Cumpston, TLi, and MJ Page, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Second Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: Wiley Online Library (2021).
20. Andreuccetti, G, Carvalho, HB, Cherpitel, CJ, Ye, Y, Ponce, JC, Kahn, T, et al. Reducing the Legal Blood Alcohol Concentration Limit for Driving in Developing Countries: A Time for Change? Results and Implications Derived from a Time-Series Analysis (2001-10) Conducted in Brazil. Addiction (2011) 106(12):2124–31. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03521.x
21. Volpe, FM, Ladeira, RM, and Fantoni, R. Evaluating the Brazilian Zero Tolerance Drinking and Driving Law: Time Series Analyses of Traffic-Related Mortality in Three Major Cities. Traffic Inj Prev (2017) 18(4):337–43. doi:10.1080/15389588.2016.1214869
22. Jomar, RT, Ramos, DDO, Fonseca, VADO, and Junger, WL. Effect of the zero-tolerance drinking and driving law on mortality due to road traffic accidents according to the type of victim, sex, and age in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: An interrupted time series study. Traffic Inj Prev (2019) 20(3):227–32. doi:10.1080/15389588.2019.1576035
23. Guimarães, AG, and da Silva, AR. Impact of Regulations to Control Alcohol Consumption by Drivers: An Assessment of Reduction in Fatal Traffic Accident Numbers in the Federal District, Brazil. Accid Anal Prev (2019) 127:110–7. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.017
24. Zhao, A, Chen, R, Qi, Y, Chen, A, Chen, X, Liang, Z, et al. Evaluating the Impact of Criminalizing Drunk Driving on Road-Traffic Injuries in Guangzhou, China: A Time-Series Study. J Epidemiol (2016) 26(8):433–9. doi:10.2188/jea.je20140103
25. Xiong, X, Wang, Z, Xu, R, and Li, G. Evaluating the Impact of Criminalizing Drunk Driving on Years of Life Lost Due to Road Traffic Deaths in One Megacity, China. Traffic Inj Prev (2019) 20(4):348–52. doi:10.1080/15389588.2019.1597269
26. Gómez-García, L, Pérez-Núñez, R, and Hidalgo-Solórzano, E. Short-term Impact of Changes in Drinking-And-Driving Legislation in Guadalajara and Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico. Cad Saude Publica (2014) 30(6):1281–92.
27. Sheng, R, Zhong, S, Barnett, AG, Weiner, BJ, Xu, J, Li, H, et al. Effect of Traffic Legislation on Road Traffic Deaths in Ningbo, China. Ann Epidemiol (2018) 28(8):576–81. doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.04.004
28. Aney, MS, and Ho, C. Deadlier Road Accidents? Traffic Safety Regulations and Heterogeneous Motorists' Behavior. Reg Sci Urban Econ (2019) 77:155–71. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2019.04.003
29. Chandran, A, Pérez-Núñez, R, Bachani, AM, Híjar, M, Salinas-Rodríguez, A, and Hyder, AA. Early Impact of a National Multi-Faceted Road Safety Intervention Program in Mexico: Results of a Time-Series Analysis. PLOS ONE (2014) 9(1):e87482. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0087482
30. Abreu, DROM, Souza, EM, and Mathias, TAF. Impact of the Brazilian Traffic Code and the Law against Drinking and Driving on Mortality from Motor Vehicle Accidents. Cad Saude Publica (2018) 34(8):e00122117. doi:10.1590/0102-311X00122117
31. Abegaz, T, Berhane, Y, Worku, A, and Assrat, A. Effectiveness of an Improved Road Safety Policy in Ethiopia: an Interrupted Time Series Study. BMC Public Health (2014) 14:539. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-539
32. Sebego, M, Naumann, RB, Rudd, RA, Voetsch, K, Dellinger, AM, and Ndlovu, C. The Impact of Alcohol and Road Traffic Policies on Crash Rates in Botswana, 2004-2011: a Time-Series Analysis. Accid Anal Prev (2014) 70:33–9. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2014.02.017
33. Nazif-Munoz, JI, and Nikolic, N. The Effectiveness of Child Restraint and Seat belt Legislation in Reducing Child Injuries: The Case of Serbia. Traffic Inj Prev (2018) 19(Suppl. 1):S7–s14. doi:10.1080/15389588.2017.1387254
34. Nazif-Muñoz, JI, Nandi, A, and Ruiz-Casares, M. Protecting Only white Children: the Impact of Child Restraint Legislation in Brazil. J Public Health (Oxf) (2019) 41(2):287–95. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdy105
35. Phung, D, Nguyen, HT, Chu, C, Sadler, R, Luong, AM, Nguyen, HT, et al. Impacts of Helmet Law on the Changes in Potential Years of Life Lost Due to Traffic Injury: a Multiple-Province Evaluation in Vietnam. Inj Prev (2020) 26(2):109–15. doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2018-043088
36. Gupta, A, Jaipuria, J, Bagdia, A, Kumar, S, Sagar, S, and Misra, MC. Motorised Two-wheeler Crash and Helmets: Injury Patterns, Severity, Mortality and the Consequence of Gender Bias. World J Surg (2014) 38(1):215–21. doi:10.1007/s00268-013-2230-3
37. Soori, H, Nasermoadeli, A, Ainy, E, Hassani, SA, and Mehmandar, MR. Association between Mandatory Seatbelt Laws and Road Traffic Injuries in Iran. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health (2011) 42(6):1540–5.
38. Leitão, PA, Bezerra, IMP, Santos, EFS, Ribeiro, SL, Takasu, JM, Carlesso, JS, et al. Mortality Due to Traffic Accidents, before and after the Reduction of the Average Speed of Motor Vehicles in the City of São Paulo, Brazil, from 2010 to 2016. J Hum Growth Develop (2019) 29:83–92. doi:10.7322/jhgd.157755
39. Liu, P, Huang, J, Wang, W, and Xu, C. Effects of Transverse Rumble Strips on Safety of Pedestrian Crosswalks on Rural Roads in China. Accid Anal Prev (2011) 43(6):1947–54. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2011.05.012
40. Guo, Y, Liu, P, Liang, Q, and Wang, W. Effects of Parallelogram-Shaped Pavement Markings on Vehicle Speed and Safety of Pedestrian Crosswalks on Urban Roads in China. Accid Anal Prev (2016) 95:438–47. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2015.07.001
41. Damsere-Derry, J, Ebel, BE, Mock, CN, Afukaar, F, Donkor, P, and Kalowole, TO. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Traffic Calming Measures on Vehicle Speeds and Pedestrian Injury Severity in Ghana. Traffic Inj Prev (2019) 20(3):336–42. doi:10.1080/15389588.2019.1581925
42. González, JF, and Prada, SI. Cámaras de fotodetección y accidentalidad vial. Evidencia para la ciudad de Cali. Desarrollo y Sociedad (2016) 77:131–82. doi:10.13043/DYS.77.4
43. Martínez-Ruíz, DM, Fandiño-Losada, A, Ponce de Leon, A, Arango-Londoño, D, Mateus, JC, Jaramillo-Molina, C, et al. Impact Evaluation of Camera Enforcement for Traffic Violations in Cali, Colombia. Accid Anal Prev (2008–20142019) 125:267–74.
44. Habyarimana, J, and Jack, W. Heckle and Chide: Results of a Randomized Road Safety Intervention in Kenya. J Public Econ (2011) 95(11):1438–46. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.06.008
45. Ji, Y, Ye, Y, Lu, Y, Li, L, and Gao, Y. An Intervention to Reduce Bicycle Injuries Among Middle School Students in Rural China. Ijerph (2017) 14(7):690. doi:10.3390/ijerph14070690
46. Woratanarat, P, Ingsathit, A, Chatchaipan, P, and Suriyawongpaisal, P. Safety Riding Program and Motorcycle-Related Injuries in Thailand. Accid Anal Prev (2013) 58:115–21. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2013.05.001
47. Huang, JY, Majid, F, and Daku, M. Estimating Effects of Uber Ride-Sharing Service on Road Traffic-Related Deaths in South Africa: a Quasi-Experimental Study. J Epidemiol Community Health (2019) 73(3):263–71. doi:10.1136/jech-2018-211006
48. Muni, K, Kobusingye, O, Mock, C, Hughes, JP, Hurvitz, PM, and Guthrie, B. Motorcycle Taxi Programme Is Associated with Reduced Risk of Road Traffic Crash Among Motorcycle Taxi Drivers in Kampala, Uganda. Int J Inj Control Saf Promot (2019) 26(3):294–301. doi:10.1080/17457300.2019.1594952
49. Murad, MK, Issa, DB, Mustafa, FM, Hassan, HO, and Husum, H. Prehospital Trauma System Reduces Mortality in Severe Trauma: a Controlled Study of Road Traffic Casualties in Iraq. Prehosp Disaster Med (2012) 27(1):36–41. doi:10.1017/s1049023x11006819
50. Vasudevan, V, Singh, P, and Basu, S. Importance of Awareness in Improving Performance of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Systems in Enhancing Traffic Safety: A Lesson from India. Traffic Inj Prev (2016) 17(7):699–704. doi:10.1080/15389588.2016.1163689
51. Quistberg, DA, Koepsell, TD, Boyle, LN, Miranda, JJ, Johnston, BD, and Ebel, BE. Pedestrian Signalization and the Risk of Pedestrian-Motor Vehicle Collisions in Lima, Peru. Accid Anal Prev (2014) 70:273–81. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2014.04.012
52. Khorasani-Zavareh, D, Shoar, S, and Saadat, S. Antilock Braking System Effectiveness in Prevention of Road Traffic Crashes in Iran. BMC Public Health (2013) 13(1):439. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-439
53. Daniels, S, Martensen, H, Schoeters, A, Van den Berghe, W, Papadimitriou, E, Ziakopoulos, A, et al. A Systematic Cost-Benefit Analysis of 29 Road Safety Measures. Accid Anal Prev (2019) 133:105292. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2019.105292
54. Salmon, PM, and Lenné, MG. Miles Away or Just Around the Corner? Systems Thinking in Road Safety Research and Practice. Accid Anal Prev (2015) 74:243–9. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2014.08.001
55. Meadows, DH. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Vermont, United States: Chelsea green publishing (2008).
56. Salmon, PM, McClure, R, and Stanton, NA. Road Transport in Drift? Applying Contemporary Systems Thinking to Road Safety. Saf Sci (2012) 50(9):1829–38. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2012.04.011
57. Adam, T, and de Savigny, D. Systems Thinking for Strengthening Health Systems in LMICs: Need for a Paradigm Shift. Health Policy Plan (2012) 27(Suppl. l_4):iv1–3. doi:10.1093/heapol/czs084
58. Ralaidovy, AH, Bachani, AM, Lauer, JA, Lai, T, and Chisholm, D. Cost-effectiveness of Strategies to Prevent Road Traffic Injuries in Eastern Sub-saharan Africa and Southeast Asia: New Results from WHO-CHOICE. Cost Eff Resour Alloc (2018) 16(1):59. doi:10.1186/s12962-018-0161-4
59. Bambach, MR, and Mitchell, RJ. Safe System Approach to Reducing Serious Injury Risk in Motorcyclist Collisions with Fixed Hazards. Accid Anal Prev (2015) 74:290–6. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2014.06.002
60. Perel, P, Ker, K, Ivers, R, and Blackhall, K. Road Safety in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: a Neglected Research Area. Inj Prev (2007) 13(4):227. doi:10.1136/ip.2007.016527
61. Zou, X, Yue, WL, and Vu, HL. Visualization and Analysis of Mapping Knowledge Domain of Road Safety Studies. Accid Anal Prev (2018) 118:131–45. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2018.06.010
62. Langer, A, Díaz-Olavarrieta, C, Berdichevsky, K, and Villar, J. Why Is Research from Developing Countries Underrepresented in International Health Literature, and what Can Be Done about it?. Bull World Health Organ (2004) 82(10):802–3.
63. Hyder, AA, Allen, KA, Di Pietro, G, Adriazola, CA, Sobel, R, Larson, K, et al. Addressing the Implementation gap in Global Road Safety: Exploring Features of an Effective Response and Introducing a 10-country Program. Am J Public Health (2012) 102(6):1061–7. doi:10.2105/ajph.2011.300563
64. Bhaumik, S, and Jagnoor, J. Diversity in the Editorial Boards of Global Health Journals. BMJ Glob Health (2019) 4(5):e001909–e. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001909
65. Horton, R. Medical Journals: Evidence of Bias against the Diseases of Poverty. The Lancet (2003) 361(9359):712–3. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)12665-7
66. Sengupta, P. Open Access Publication: Academic Colonialism or Knowledge Philanthropy?. Geoforum (2021) 118:203–6. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.04.001
67. Toroyan, T, Peden, M, Iaych, K, and Krug, E. More Action Needed to Protect Vulnerable Road Users. The Lancet (2013) 381(9871):977–9. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60606-6
68. Constant, A, and Lagarde, E. Protecting Vulnerable Road Users from Injury. Plos Med (2010) 7(3):e1000228. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000228
69. Willis, C, Lybrand, S, and Bellamy, N. Alcohol Ignition Interlock Programmes for Reducing Drink Driving Recidivism. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2004) 2004(3):CD004168. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004168.pub2
70. Beyer, FR, and Ker, K. Street Lighting for Preventing Road Traffic Injuries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2009)(1) CD004728. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004728.pub2
71. Mulvaney, CA, Smith, S, Watson, MC, Parkin, J, Coupland, C, Miller, P, et al. Cycling Infrastructure for Reducing Cycling Injuries in Cyclists. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2015) 2015(12):CD010415. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010415.pub2
Keywords: systematic review, accidents, traffic, wounds and injuries, systems analysis, low and middle income, road safety, decade of action
Citation: Tavakkoli M, Torkashvand-Khah Z, Fink G, Takian A, Kuenzli N, de Savigny D and Cobos Muñoz D (2022) Evidence From the Decade of Action for Road Safety: A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Interventions in Low and Middle-Income Countries. Public Health Rev 43:1604499. doi: 10.3389/phrs.2022.1604499
Received: 01 October 2021; Accepted: 07 January 2022;
Published: 21 February 2022.
Edited by:
Ana Ribeiro, University Porto, PortugalReviewed by:
Camilo Gutierrez Osorio, National University of Colombia, ColombiaAna Catarina Queiroga, University Porto, Portugal
Copyright © 2022 Tavakkoli, Torkashvand-Khah, Fink, Takian, Kuenzli, de Savigny and Cobos Muñoz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
PHR is edited by the Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+) in a partnership with the Association of Schools of Public Health of the European Region (ASPHER)+
*Correspondence: Maryam Tavakkoli, maryam.tavakkoli@swisstph.ch