Pixelated
Moderator - CPST Instructor
In looking for traffic safety data more domestic than this Swedish study and more recent than this US one I came across this NHTSA report that states:
Since I am not terribly great at interpreting statistics, what would be a reasonable way to translate the 71% for the under 1 group into an assumed benefit of RF when compared to the 54% of the 1-4 age group? IS that reasonable, or would you need to know more about the data to make an assumption like that? I suppose not, as likely a significant number of those 1-4 year olds were improperly restrained or boostered too early...just pondering.
I wish there was more recent info about FF and RF than that one from 2003. Restraints have changed so much since then.
Research on the effectiveness of child safety seats has found that child safety seats, when used properly, has found them to reduce fatal injury by 71 percent for infants (younger than 1 year old) and by 54 percent for toddlers (1 to 4 years old) in passenger cars. For infants and toddlers in light trucks, the corresponding reductions are 58 percent and 59 percent, respectively.
Since I am not terribly great at interpreting statistics, what would be a reasonable way to translate the 71% for the under 1 group into an assumed benefit of RF when compared to the 54% of the 1-4 age group? IS that reasonable, or would you need to know more about the data to make an assumption like that? I suppose not, as likely a significant number of those 1-4 year olds were improperly restrained or boostered too early...just pondering.
I wish there was more recent info about FF and RF than that one from 2003. Restraints have changed so much since then.
Last edited: