|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposal for an RCT of right vs left motoring (was Happy Thanksgiving)From: Malcolm Griffiths (Malcolm@mgriff22.demon.co.uk)Sun Nov 30 06:38:39 1997
In message <34809B28.ED4C69D2@waonline.com>, Cheri Van Hoover <cherivh@waonline.com> writes > >Malcolm Griffiths wrote: > >> >Perhaps that it is much more difficult to hit someone solidly on a traffic >> >circle than at a standard intersection? Or maybe it is just that it requires >> >a fairly straight road with significant width to get up to speeds likely to >> >cause fatal accidents. ;-) >> > >> We need an RCT controlling for these variables. Would NIH find it? > >I'm not so sure we need an RCT. I believe this could be adequately tested using >computer modeling and real-time simulated crashes. The company to do it would >be >Failure Analysis in Menlo Park, CA. This is just their cup of tea. The RCT >could >be helpful when comparing crosswalks, jaywalking, and zebra crossings, however. > There is a big problem with computer modelling of road traffic. A few years ago a new dual carraige way was built connecting two parrallel motorways (=freeways) near to where we then lived. Coincidentally the brother of a close friend worked on the team which did the computer modelling to predict traffic flows and thereby produce the computer programme to control the several sets of traffic lights on the interchange. Once it was open and the software installed it was complete chaos. Over about two months there were several changes until it started to work right. I met the "brother" at a family get together (christening). He explained to me that the traffic flow was exactly as they had predicted. His brother (my friend), upon overhearing the conversation added a slight rider - the traffic flow had been exactly as predicted in one of the 30 or so computer models they had generated! I think we still need an RCT. In order to pass institutional ethics board review we need to minimise risk to participants. We need to begin the study somewhere with long straight roads and low traffic density. Unfortunately this will compromise the power of the study and so a long period of study will be needed. Perhaps after interim analysis we could broaden to intermediate risk areas. Wonder whether this sounds like somewhere in Nevada or Arizona? Just joking! Malcolm Griffiths MD,MRCOG,MFFP,Cert.Mgmnt Obstetrician & Gynaecologist Luton & Dunstable Hosp.,UK. Tel: 01582-497459 (office) Fax: 01582-497376 01525-222849 (home) email: Malcolm@mgriff22.demon.co.uk http://www.obgyn.net/board/griffith.htm "CLINICAL FREEDOM IS THE LAST REFUGE OF THE CLINICALLY INCOMPETENT!" (Someone [1997])
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Dec 2 05:22:04 2009 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.