OBJECTIVES: We compared cycling injury risks of 14 route types and other route infrastructure features. METHODS: We recruited 690 city residents injured while cycling in Toronto or Vancouver, Canada. A case-crossover design compared route infrastructure at each injury site to that of a randomly selected control site from the same trip. RESULTS: Of 14 route types, cycle tracks had the lowest risk (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02, 0.54), about one ninth the risk of the reference: major streets with parked cars and no bike infrastructure. Risks on major streets were lower without parked cars (adjusted OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.41, 0.96) and with bike lanes (adjusted OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.29, 1.01). Local streets also had lower risks (adjusted OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.31, 0.84). Other infrastructure characteristics were associated with increased risks: streetcar or train tracks (adjusted OR = 3.0; 95% CI = 1.8, 5.1), downhill grades (adjusted OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.7, 3.1), and construction (adjusted OR = 1.9; 95% CI = 1.3, 2.9). CONCLUSIONS: The lower risks on quiet streets and with bike-specific infrastructure along busy streets support the route-design approach used in many northern European countries. Transportation infrastructure with lower bicycling injury risks merits public health support to reduce injuries and promote cycling.
OBJECTIVES: We compared cycling injury risks of 14 route types and other route infrastructure features. METHODS: We recruited 690 city residents injured while cycling in Toronto or Vancouver, Canada. A case-crossover design compared route infrastructure at each injury site to that of a randomly selected control site from the same trip. RESULTS: Of 14 route types, cycle tracks had the lowest risk (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02, 0.54), about one ninth the risk of the reference: major streets with parked cars and no bike infrastructure. Risks on major streets were lower without parked cars (adjusted OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.41, 0.96) and with bike lanes (adjusted OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.29, 1.01). Local streets also had lower risks (adjusted OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.31, 0.84). Other infrastructure characteristics were associated with increased risks: streetcar or train tracks (adjusted OR = 3.0; 95% CI = 1.8, 5.1), downhill grades (adjusted OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.7, 3.1), and construction (adjusted OR = 1.9; 95% CI = 1.3, 2.9). CONCLUSIONS: The lower risks on quiet streets and with bike-specific infrastructure along busy streets support the route-design approach used in many northern European countries. Transportation infrastructure with lower bicycling injury risks merits public health support to reduce injuries and promote cycling.
Authors: M Anne Harris; Conor C O Reynolds; Meghan Winters; Mary Chipman; Peter A Cripton; Michael D Cusimano; Kay Teschke Journal: Inj Prev Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 2.399
Authors: Stephen J Mooney; Charles J DiMaggio; Gina S Lovasi; Kathryn M Neckerman; Michael D M Bader; Julien O Teitler; Daniel M Sheehan; Darby W Jack; Andrew G Rundle Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Anne C Lusk; Patrick Morency; Luis F Miranda-Moreno; Walter C Willett; Jack T Dennerlein Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Stephen J Mooney; Caroline Magee; Kolena Dang; Julie C Leonard; Jingzhen Yang; Frederick P Rivara; Beth E Ebel; Ali Rowhani-Rahbar; D Alex Quistberg Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Kay Teschke; Jeff R Brubacher; Steven M Friedman; Peter A Cripton; M Anne Harris; Conor C O Reynolds; Hui Shen; Melody Monro; Garth Hunte; Mary Chipman; Michael D Cusimano; Nancy Smith Lea; Shelina Babul; Meghan Winters Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-09-11 Impact factor: 3.295