ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Most individuals prefer bicycling separated from motor traffic. However, cycle tracks (physically separated bicycle-exclusive paths along roads, as found in The Netherlands) are discouraged in the USA by engineering guidance that suggests that facilities such as cycle tracks are more dangerous than the street. The objective of this study conducted in Montreal (with a longstanding network of cycle tracks) was to compare bicyclist injury rates on cycle tracks versus in the street. For six cycle tracks and comparable reference streets, vehicle/bicycle crashes and health record injury counts were obtained and use counts conducted. The relative risk (RR) of injury on cycle tracks, compared with reference streets, was determined. Overall, 2.5 times as many cyclists rode on cycle tracks compared with reference streets and there were 8.5 injuries and 10.5 crashes per million bicycle-kilometres. The RR of injury on cycle tracks was 0.72 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.85) compared with bicycling in reference streets. These data suggest that the injury risk of bicycling on cycle tracks is less than bicycling in streets. The construction of cycle tracks should not be discouraged.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Risk of injury for bicycling on cycle tracks versus in
the street
Anne C Lusk,
1
Peter G Furth,
2
Patrick Morency,
3,4
Luis F Miranda-Moreno,
5
Walter C Willett,
1,6
Jack T Dennerlein
7,8
ABSTRACT
Most individuals prefer bicycling separated from motor
traffic. However, cycle tracks (physically separated
bicycle-exclusive paths along roads, as found in The
Netherlands) are discouraged in the USA by engineering
guidance that suggests that facilities such as cycle
tracks are more dangerous than the street. The objective
of this study conducted in Montreal (with a longstanding
network of cycle tracks) was to compare bicyclist injury
rates on cycle tracks versus in the street. For six cycle
tracks and comparable reference streets, vehicle/bicycle
crashes and health record injury counts were obtained
and use counts conducted. The relative risk (RR) of injury
on cycle tracks, compared with reference streets, was
determined. Overall, 2.5 times as many cyclists rode on
cycle tracks compared with reference streets and there
were 8.5 injuries and 10.5 crashes per million bicycle-
kilometres. The RR of injury on cycle tracks was 0.72
(95% CI 0.60 to 0.85) compared with bicycling in
reference streets. These data suggest that the injury risk
of bicycling on cycle tracks is less than bicycling in
streets. The construction of cycle tracks should not be
discouraged.
Bicycling could address obesity, cancer, stroke,
diabetes, asthma, mortality and pollution;
1 2
however, the bicycling environment is a limiting
factor. The predominant bicycle facilities in The
Netherlands and Denmark are cycle tracks, or
bicycle paths along streets that are physically
separated from motor trafc, bicycle-exclusive and
with a parallel sidewalk.
3
Due to the separation
from vehicles afforded by 29 000 km of cycle tracks
in The Netherlands plus other initiatives,
4
27% of
Dutch trips are by bicycle, 55% are women, and the
bicyclist injury rate is 0.14 injured/million km.
5
In
the USA, 0.5% of commuters bicycle to work, only
24% of adult cyclists are women,
6
and the injury
rate of bicyclists is at least 26 times greater than in
The Netherlands.
5
The chief obstacle to bicycling,
especially for women,
7
children
8
and seniors
9
is
perceived danger of vehicular trafc. This perceived
danger from cars appears to be real,
10
as corrobo-
rated by survey participants who prefer cycle tracks
over roads.
11
Cycle track construction has been hampered in
the USA by engineering guidance in the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation
Ofcials (AASHTO) Guide for the development of
bicycle facilities
12
which cautions against building
two-way paths along, but physically separated
from, a parallel road. AASHTO states that sidewalk
bikeways are unsafe and implies the same about
shared-use paths parallel to roads, listing numerous
safety concerns and permitting their use only in
special situations. Cycle tracks, which can be one or
two-way and resemble shared-use paths, are not
mentioned in the AASHTO bike guide. A long-
standing, and yet not rigorously proved, philosophy
in the USA has suggested instead that bicyclists
fare best when they behave as, and are treated as,
operators of vehicles.
13
The details about cycle
tracks in the Dutch bicycle design manual CROW
3
and crash rate comparisons between the USA and
The Netherlands
5
have been dismissed by vehicular
cycling proponents,
14
with arguments of non-
transferability to the American environment. Cycle
tracks have been controversial, especially due to
conicting studies with warnings of increased crash
rates.
15
The warnings, which in the USA result in
striped bike lanes but not cycle tracks, come
without any substantial study of the safety of
North American cycle tracks. Using existing crash
and injury data from Montreal, Canada, a city with
a network of cycle tracks in use for more than
20 years, this study compared bicyclistsinjury and
crash rates with published data and bicyclists
injury rates on cycle tracks versus in the street.
METHODS
We studied six cycle tracks in Montreal that are
two-way on one side of the street. Each cycle track
was compared with one or two reference streets
without bicycle facilities that were considered
alternative bicycling routes. One reference street
was a continuation of the street with the cycle
track; the remaining streets were parallel to the
cycle track with the same cross streets as endpoints
and, therefore, subject to approximately the same
intersection frequency and cross trafc as the cycle
track.
Injury and vehicle/bicycle crash rates per
bicycle-kilometre
The injury and crash rates for each cycle track were
determined from the emergency medical response
(EMR) database
16
and police-recorded vehicle/
bicycle crashes and estimated on the cycle tracks
per bicycle-km. Automated 24-h bicycle counts on
Montreal cycle tracks are available for selected
years, with 20e64 days in each sample from May
to September. We used linear interpolation between
the 2000 and 2008 samples to determine average
daily use for the date ranges of the injury and crash
counts. Average daily use was converted to annual
use by multiplying by 200 effective daysin the
1 April to 15 November bicycling season (when
seasonal cycle tracks are open), recognising that
1
Department of Nutrition,
Harvard School of Public Health,
Boston, MA USA
2
Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering,
Northeastern University, Boston,
MA USA
3
Direction de sante
´publique de
Montre
´al, Montre
´al, Que
´bec,
Canada
4
De
´partement de Me
´decine
Sociale et Pre
´ventive, Universite
´
de Montre
´al, Montre
´al, Que
´bec,
Canada
5
Department of Civil Engineering
and Applied Mechanics, McGill
University, Montre
´al, Que
´bec,
Canada
6
Department of Epidemiology,
Harvard School of Public Health,
Boston, MA, USA
7
Department of Environmental
Health, Harvard School of Public
Health, Boston, MA, USA
8
Department of Orthopaedic
Surgery, Brigham and Women’s
Hospital, Harvard Medical
School, Boston, MA, USA
Correspondence to
Dr Anne Lusk, Harvard School of
Public Health, 665 Huntington
Avenue, Building II, Room 314,
Boston, MA 02115, USA;
annelusk@hsph.harvard.edu
Accepted 1 December 2010
Published Online First
9 February 2011
This paper is freely available
online under the BMJ Journals
unlocked scheme, see http://
injuryprevention.bmj.com/site/
about/unlocked.xhtml
Injury Prevention 2011;17:131e135. doi:10.1136/ip.2010.028696 131
Brief report
bicycle use tends to be less in April, October and November than
in the sampled months. Use estimates were converted to bicycle-
km by multiplying by segment length and the fraction of the
cycle tracks length ridden per cyclist. This fraction, which
ranged from 0.6 to 0.9, was determined using expert judgement
considering the cycle track length and opportunities for turning
on and off.
Relative Risk (RR) of injury for cycle tracks
The RR of the cycle track compared with the reference street
was estimated using bicyclist counts and injuries from the EMR
database.
16
Although injury (EMR) and bicycle/vehicle crash
data from police records overlap strongly, the injury data have
been shown to be more exhaustive
17
and were available for
a longer period. Injury counts were determined for the 1 April to
15 November bicycling season and within 15 m of each street
centerline. For comparability with exposure data, it was
important to exclude individuals injured at intersections who
may have been riding on a cross street; however, the EMR
database does not indicate which street the injured cyclist was
using. Therefore, using the police crash database we determined
for each section studied the fraction of bicycle/vehicle crashes
involving cyclists who were riding on cross streets, and reduced
injury counts by that fraction.
Historical bicycle counts were available for the cycle tracks
but not the reference streets. To obtain an unbiased measure of
relative exposure, simultaneous 2 h bicycle counts were
conducted at parallel counting sites on each cycle track and its
reference street(s). Using a ratio of simultaneous counts elimi-
nates systematic effects on bicycle use such as weather, time and
day. The simultaneous counts were made during mild weather
commuting hours in 2009.
The RR of injury for each cycle track was calculated as:
RR ¼
injuriestrack
bikestrack
injuriesref
bikesref
where injuries
track
and injuries
ref
are the count of injuries on the
cycle track and reference street(s), respectively, and bikes
track
and
bikes
ref
are the corresponding cyclist counts.
Ninety-ve percent CI were calculated using the variance of
log(ratio) based on a Poisson distribution for incidents. CI that
did not include 1 were considered statistically signicant. RR for
all cycle tracks was calculated similarly using the summed data
from all the observations.
Relative danger from vehicular traffic
Reference streets were selected with vehicular trafc danger
(volume, speed, heavy vehicles) as similar as possible to their
cycle track; however, it was impossible to achieve exact simi-
larity. Therefore, to compare the vehicular trafc danger, we
also calculated the ratio of motor vehicle occupant (MVO)
injuries on the cycle track street to MVO injuries on the refer-
ence street. MVO injury counts are considered a surrogate for
trafc danger a bicyclist might face on a given street apart from
any treatment.
RESULTS
All six cycle tracks were two-way on one side of the street and
separated from trafc by raised medians, parking lanes, or
delineator posts. There were 8.5 injuries and 10.5 crashes per
million bicycle-km. The Brébeuf and Maisonneuve cycle tracks
stand out as safer than the other four (table 1).
Table 1 Injury and vehicle/bicycle crash rates for cycle tracks in Montreal, Quebec*
Cycle track Configuration Separation
Lengthy
(km)
Length
factorz
Cyclists/day,
1999e2008 x
Bike-km/year
(millions){**
Injuries/
year yy
Crashes/
yearzz
Injuries per
million bike-km
Crashes per
million bike-km
1. Bre
´beuf (seasonal) 2-Way, 1 side of one-way street,
street level
Delineator posts and parking lane 1.0 0.9 5316 0.96 3.9 1.8 4.1 1.9
2. Rachel 2-Way, 1 side of two-way street,
street level
Raised median, delineator posts,
parking lane
3.5 0.6 2581 1.08 12.6 17.0 11.6 15.7
3. Berri 2-Way, 1 side of two-way street,
street/sidewalk level
Raised median, delineator posts,
and parking lane
1.4 0.8 2778 0.62 7.8 10.2 12.5 16.4
4. Maisonneuve, w. island
(seasonal)
2-Way, 1 side of one-way street,
street level
Delineator posts 1.9 0.9 2379 0.81 1.9 2.6 2.3 3.2
5. Chr Colombe (seasonal) 2-Way, 1 side of two-way street,
sidewalk level
Curb and (part) planting strip 3.7 0.7 921 0.48 6.7 9.2 14.1 19.3
6. Rene
´-Levesque 2-Way, 1 side of two-way street,
street level
Raised median, delineator posts,
parking lane
1.3 0.8 1108 0.23 2.8 3.2 12.3 13.9
All 4.18 35.7 44.0 8.5 10.5
*Whole segments of the cycle track were studied and not just intersections.
yLength of the section studied, which may be less that the entire cycle track length for comparability with reference streets.
zFraction of the study section’s length ridden by a typical rider.
xAverage for the May to September period over the period 1999e2008.
{‘Year’ is the 7.5 month period (1 April to 15 November) when the seasonal cycle tracks are open.
**Demand is lower in April, October and November and, therefore, bicycle volume for a ‘year’ is assumed to be 200 times the daily volume.
yyInjuries (data source eemergency medical response) between 1 April and 15 November for the period 1 April 1999 to 31 July 2008 divided by 9.53.
zzBicycleemotor vehicle crashes (data source epolice reports) between 1 April and 15 November 2002e6, divided by 5.
132 Injury Prevention 2011;17:131e135. doi:10.1136/ip.2010.028696
Brief report
Compared with bicycling on a reference street, the overall RR
of injury on a cycle track was 0.72 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.85); thus,
these cycle tracks had a 28% lower injury rate. Three of the cycle
tracks exhibited RR less than 0.5, and none showed a signi-
cantly greater risk than its reference street. Overall, 2.5 times as
many cyclists used the cycle tracks compared with the reference
streets (table 2).
The relative danger from vehicular trafc of the cycle tracks
compared with their reference streets was close to 1.0 overall,
but with a wide range (table 3). Not surprisingly, the Brébeuf
and Maisonneuve cycle tracks with lowest crash rate and rela-
tive injury risk (tables 1 and 2) also had the lowest relative
danger from vehicular trafc (table 3). Yet even for the four cycle
tracks on streets with vehicular trafc danger similar to or
greater than its reference street, the cycle tracks still had less or
a similar risk of injury.
DISCUSSION
Contrary to AASHTOs safety cautions about road-parallel
paths and its exclusion of cycle tracks, our results suggest that
two-way cycle tracks on one side of the road have either lower
or similar injury rates compared with bicycling in the street
without bicycle provisions. This lowered risk is also in spite of the
less-than-ideal design of the Montreal cycle tracks, such as lacking
parking setbacks at intersections, a recommended practice.
18
While the goal of this study was to consider both one and two-
way cycle tracks, all of the Montreal cycle tracks were two-way
with half the bicyclists riding in a direction opposite to that of
the closest vehicular trafc, a practice not favoured by AASHTO.
Although the Montreal cycle tracks were two-way, they had
lower or similar risk compared with the road. The Dutch CROW
bicycle guidelines suggest that one-way cycle tracks are even
safer.
3
The crash rate for Montreals cycle tracks (10.5 crashes per
million bicycle-km) is low compared with the few and incon-
sistent crash rates in the literature. When calculated to include
only vehicle/bicycle crashes, these rates range from 3.75
5
to 54
19
in the USA and from 46
20
to 67
21
in Canada. The injury rate (8.5
injuries per million bicycle-km) lacks comparable data in the
literature, partly because few communities have accessible
bicycle-incident ambulance records. Although the Brébeuf and
Maisonneuve cycle tracks were safer, the sample of six cycle
Table 2 RR of injury for cycle tracks compared to similar on-street routes for Montreal, Quebec*
Cycle trackyReference streetzLimiting cross streets
Length
(km)
Cycle track Reference street
RR (95% CI){
2-h
bike
count
EMR-
reported
injuriesx
2-h
bike
count
EMR-
reported
injuriesx
1. Bre
´beuf St Denis (N) Rachel eLaurier 1.0 1193 37 437 32 0.42 (0.26 to 0.68)
2. Rachel Mont Royal St Urbain eMarquette 3.5 990 120 613 63 1.18 (0.87 to 1.60)
3. Berri St Denis (S) Cherrier eViger 1.4 763 74 134 27 0.48 (0.31 to 0.75)
4. Maisonneuve Both Claremont eWood 1.9 547 18 176** 18 0.32 (0.17 to 0.62)
Sherbrooke (W) 129 14 0.30
Ste Catherine 47 40.39
5. Christophe Colomb Both Gouin eJarry 3.7 407 64 122 19 1.01 (0.61 to 1.68)
Saint-Hubert 45 90.79
Christophe Colomb (S) Villeray eRosemont 2.3 77 10 1.21
6. Rene
´Levesque Sherbrooke (E) Lorimier eSt Hubert 1.3 109 27 130 32 1.01 (0.60 to 1.68)
All 15.1 4009 340 1612 191 0.72 (0.60 to 0.85)
*Statistically significant comparisons are shown in bold.
yAll cycle tracks are two-way on one side of the street.
zAn on-street bike route on a parallel street in close proximity of the cycle track.
xInjuries recorded by emergency medical response (EMR) services between 1 April 1999 and 31 July 2008 for the season 1 April to 15 November.
{95%CI calculated using the variance of log(RR) based on a Poisson distribution.
**For comparisons having two reference streets, the total number of bicyclists is used from both streets.
Table 3 Relative danger from vehicular traffic*
Cycle track street Reference street
MVO injuriesy
Relative traffic danger of cycle
track street (95% CI)z
Cycle track
street
Reference
street
1. Bre
´beuf St Denis (N) 8900.09 (0.04 to 0.18)
2. Rachel Mont Royal 86 69 1.25 (0.91 to 1.73)
3. Berri St Denis (S) 127 116 1.09 (0.85 to 1.41)
4. Maisonneuve Both 13 59x0.22 (0.12 to 0.40)
Sherbrooke (W) 72
Ste Catherine 46
5. Christophe Colomb Both 367 217x1.69 (1.43 to 2.00)
Saint-Hubert 268
Christophe Colomb (S) 166
6. Rene
´Levesque Sherbrooke (E) 196 205 0.96 (0.79 to 1.16)
All All 797 756 1.05 (0.95 to 1.16)
*Statistically significant comparisons are shown in bold.
yInjuries to motor vehicle occupants recorded by emergency medical respons e (EMR) services between 1 January 1999 and 31 July
2008.
z95% CI calculated using the variance of log(RR) based on a Poisson distribution.
xFor comparisons having two reference streets, the average number of injuries of the reference streets is used.
MVO, motor vehicle occupant.
Injury Prevention 2011;17:131e135. doi:10.1136/ip.2010.028696 133
Brief report
tracks was too small to determine which factors make some
safer.
In one of the few comparisons of bicycling in the street versus
bicycling on a separated path parallel to the street in the USA,
Wachtel and Lewiston
22
determined a relative crash risk of 1.8
for bicycling on sidewalks which had been designated as bike-
ways, compared with bicycling in the adjacent street in Palo
Alto, California. However, their study considered only intersec-
tion crashes, omitting non-intersection crashes that include
being hit from behind, sideswiped, or struck by a car door. The
authors, though, reported that 26% of cyclistemotor vehicle
collisions city-wide in Palo Alto were non-intersection crashes. If
non-intersection crashes are included to match this 26%
proportion, reanalysis of the Wachtel and Lewiston
22
data in the
article shows that there is no signicant difference in risk
between the sidewalk bikeway and the street (table 4). For
bicyclists riding in the same direction as trafc, as would be case
with one-way cycle tracks, sidewalk bikeways carried only half
the risk of the street. Therefore, the Wachtel and Lewiston
22
data, when corrected to include non-intersection crashes,
corroborate our ndings that separated paths are safer or at least
no more dangerous than bicycling in the street. Furthermore, as
the most common cause of fatal bicyclist collisions in urban
areas is overtaking,
23
it is probable that an analysis accounting
for the severity of injury would be still more favourable towards
cycle tracks.
Our study considered whole segments of cycle tracks and not
just intersections, measured bicycle exposure directly, and
included appropriate comparison groups. The study, though,
only included analysis of six cycle tracks, all of which were two-
way and in the same city, and lacked injury severity data. This
research underscores the need for better bicycle counting and
injury surveillance and for additional safety studies, particularly
of one-way cycle tracks, intersections, injury severity and other
factors that affect cycle track safety.
IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY
Public health and bicycling advocates in the USA have faced
a dichotomy, believing from surveys and European experience
that cycle tracks encourage more bicycling, yet being warned
that they lead to higher crash and injury rates. Our results
suggest that cycle tracks lessen, or at least do not increase, crash
and injury rates compared with the street. The construction of
cycle tracks should not be discouraged.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Kevin Manaugh (McGill
University) and Nathalie Valois (Montreal police), who performed the geographical
queries to extract data from the crash database, and Qi Sun and Elaine Hoffman for
a review of the statistics.
Funding ACL was supported by a Ruth L Kirschstein National Research Service
Award, F32 HL083639 from the National Institutes for Health, National Heart, Lung
and Blood Institute. LFM-M is supported for data collection by the Natural Sciences
and Engineering Research Council of Canada (discovery grant eindividual).
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval The Harvard School of Public Health IRB reviewed this protocol and
found that approval was not required. The HSPH IRB made an exemption
determination.
Contributors PGF had full access to the data in the study and takes responsibility for
the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Conception and design:
ACL and PGF. Acquisition of data: ACL, PGF, PM and LFM-M. Analysis and
interpretation of data: ANL, PGF, PM, LFM-M, WCW and JTD. Drafting of manuscript:
ACL, PGF. Critical revision for intellectual content: ACL, PGF, PM, LFM-M, WCW and
JTD. Statistical expertise: ACL, PGF, PM, LFM-M, WCW and JTD. Administrative,
technical or material support: WCW. Study supervision: PGF, WCW and JTD.
Table 4 Crash RR from Wachtel and Lewiston
22
data with non-intersection crashes included*
Sidewalk Roadway All RR, sidewalk versus
in-street (95% CI)yp ValuezRiders Crashes Riders Crashes Riders Crashes
Intersection onlyx
All cyclists 971 41 2005 48 2976 89 1.76 (1.16 to 2.68) 0.01
Bicycling in same direction
as closest traffic lane
656 13 1897 43 2553 56 0.87 (0.47 to 1.63) 0.56
All crashes{
All cyclists 971 41 2005 79 2976 120 1.07 (0.73 to 1.56) 0.79
Bicycling in same direction
as closest traffic lane
656 13 1897 71 2553 84 0.53 (0.29 to 0.96) 0.02
*Statistically significant comparisons are shown in bold.
y95% CI calculated using the variance of log(IRR) based on a Poisson distribution.
zSignificance, calculated using the variance of log(IRR) based on a Poisson distribution (for comparison with original article).
xAuthors’ original data.
{Non-intersection crashes amounting to 26% of total crashes added to roadway crashes.
What is already known on this subject
<Individuals, in particular women, children, and seniors, prefer
to bicycle separated from motor traffic.
<Cycle tracks (physically-separated bicycle-exclusive paths
along roads) exist and continue to be built in The Netherlands
where 27% of all trips are by bicycle and 55% of bicycle riders
are female.
<Engineering guidance in the United States has discouraged
bicycle facilities that resemble cycle tracks, including parallel
sidepaths and sidewalk bikeways, suggesting that these
facilities and cycle tracks are more dangerous than bicycling
in the street.
What this study adds
<Overall, 2 ½ times as many cyclists rode on the cycle tracks
compared with the reference streets.
<There were 8.5 injuries and 10.5 crashes per million-bicycle
kilometers respectively on cycle tracks compared to published
injury rates ranging from 3.75 to 67 for bicycling on streets.
The relative risk of injury on the cycle track was 0.72 (95%
CI=0,60-0.85) compared with bicycling in the reference
streets.
<Cycle tracks lessen, or at least do not increase, crash and
injury rates compared to bicycling in the street.
134 Injury Prevention 2011;17:131e135. doi:10.1136/ip.2010.028696
Brief report
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
REFERENCES
1. Lusk AC, Mekary RA, Feskanich D, et al. Bicycle riding, walking, and weight gain in
premenopausal women. Arch Intern Med 2010;170:1050e6.
2. Andersen LB, Schnohr P, Schroll M, et al. All-cause mortality associated with
physical activity during leisure time, work, sports, and cycling to work. Arch Intern
Med 2000;160:1621e8.
3. CROW. Design manual for bicycle traffic. Netherlands: National Information and
Technology Platform for Infrastructure, Traffic, Transport, and Public Space, 2006.
4. Verkeersnet.nl. Fietsersbond: Veel meer fietspad dan bekend in ons land. 2009.
http://www.verkeersnet.nl/1782/fietsersbond-veel-meer-fietspad-dan-bekend-in-ons-
land/ (accessed 21 Apr 2010).
5. Pucher J, Buehler R. Making cycling irresistible: lessons from the Netherlands,
Denmark, and Germany. Transport Reviews 2008;28:1e34.
6. U.S. Census Bureau. American community survey 3-year estimates B08006 sex of
workers by means of transportation to work euniverse eworkers 16 years and over.
2006e2008. http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_bm¼y&-
geo_id¼01000US&-ds_name¼ACS_2008_3YR_G00_&-_lang¼en&-
_caller¼geoselect&-state¼dt&-format¼&-
mt_name¼ACS_2008_3YR_G2000_B08006 (accessed 26 Jan 2010).
7. Garrard J, Rose G, Lo SK. Promoting transportation cycling for women: the role of
bicycle infrastructure. Prev Med 2008;46:55e9.
8. Mehan TJ, Gardner R, Smith GA, et al. Bicycle-related injuries among children and
adolescents in the United States. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2009;48:166e73.
9. Hayes JS, Henslee B, Ferber J. Bicycle injury prevention and safety in senior riders.
J Trauma Nurs 2003;10:66e8.
10. Haileyesus T, Annest JL, Dellinger AM. Cyclists injured while sharing the road with
motor vehicles. Inj Prev 2007;13:202e6.
11. Winters M, Teschke K. Route preferences among adults in the near market
for bicycling: findings of the cycling in cities study. Am J Health Promot
2010;25:40e7.
12. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Guide
for the development of bicycle facilities. Washington, DC: AASHTO, 1999.
13. Forester J. Effective cycling. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1984.
14. Forester J. The bikeway controversy.Transportation Quarterly. Washington, D.C.,
USA, Spring, 2001:55.
15. Jensen S. Bicycle tracks and lanes: a before-and-after study. Transportation
Research Board 87th Annual Meeting, 2008-1-13 to 2008-1-17. Washington, DC.
2008:15.
16. Morency P, Cloutier MS. From targeted “black spots” to area-wide pedestrian
safety. Inj Prev 2006;12:360e4.
17. Langley JD, Dow N, Stephenson S, et al. Missing cyclists. Inj Prev 2003;9:376e9.
18. Velo Quebec. Technical handbook of bikeway design. 2nd ed. Quebec: Ministere
des Transport du Quebec and the Secretariat au Loisir et au Sport, 2003.
19. Dennerlein JT, Meeker JD. Occupational injuries among Boston bicycle
messengers. Am J Ind Med 2002;42:519e25.
20. Aultman-Hall L, Hall FL. OttawaeCarleton commuter cyclist on- and off-road
incident rates. Accid Anal Prev 1998;30:29e43.
21. Aultman-Hall L, Kaltenecker MG. Toronto bicycle commuter safety rates. Accid
Anal Prev 1999;31:675e86.
22. Wachtel A, Lewiston D. Risk factors for bicycle-motor vehicle collisions at
intersections. ITE Journal of Institute of Transportation Engineers 1994:30e5.
23. McCarthy M, Gilbert K. Cyclist road deaths in London 1985e1992: drivers, vehicles,
manoeuvres and injuries. Accid Anal Prev 1996;28:275e9.
Dog attacks in Canada’s North
Following a recent mauling of a 6-year-old girl by four dogs in an Inuit community, a study by
a veterinarian in Thunder Bay, Ontario, based on media reports, revealed that ‘native commu-
nities suffer bite wounds or mauling deaths from dogs at rates more than 100 times that of the
rest of Canada’. (Postmedia news, Gazette, December 17, 2010)
Collected and edited by Barry Pless
Injury Prevention 2011;17:131e135. doi:10.1136/ip.2010.028696 135
Brief report
... Although cycling does have limitations with respect to distances, carrying capacity and weather protection, it offers a wide range of benefits to the environment such as reduced road congestion and shortened commuting times in urban centres. In addition, cycling promotes fitness and weight loss while also reducing stress, which may create externality benefits for individuals and society (Lusk et al., 2011;Chen, 2015). ...
... The bulk of cycling-related research focuses on health benefits and infrastructure, including that of Lusk et al. (2011) andChen (2015), who discuss many of the potential benefits and challenges of bicycle commuting and infrastructure. A handful of papers have been particularly influential in determining the relevant variables in the consumer's choice to cycle. ...
Article
This paper analyses the substitution effects between commuter bicycling and the price of gasoline. A multiple regression analysis is conducted to determine the elasticity of demand for bicycles from gasoline as well as other relevant variables, availability of bike sharing, population density, bike paths, median income, days below zero degrees Celsius, precipitation, and the CPI for recreational vehicles (including bicycles) and public transportation. The analysis is conducted using both pooled average and random effects regression models. The modelling showed that there is indeed a substitution effect on the demand for commuter cycling due to the price of gasoline. The study also shows asymmetrical results for male and female cyclists, showing that male and female cycling habits are influenced by different variables. This analysis suggests that policy makers can influence rates of cycling by manipulating the cost of its alternatives as well as the opportunity costs of cycling itself.
... A bicycle boulevard in this study means a traffic calmed side street designated and improved for cyclists where motor vehicle volume and speed are very low. Lusk et al. (2011) found the risk to be 3.5 times lower along dedicated bicycle tracks compared to parallel roads without a bicycle facility. ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
This study deals with cycling safety on a route level. Firstly, it aims to define indicators to compare the safety levels of different cycling routes between a specific origin and destination. Secondly, it discusses how these indicators can be applied by road authorities in order to assess and improve the safety of cycling routes. And finally, it aims to discuss the function of different types of infrastructure in the cycling network, as elements in cycling routes.
... There is a need for more injury prevention strategies in our community targeting RTCs and work-related injuries. This includes vehicle speed monitoring, strict penalties against road traffic violations, compulsory usage of seatbelts, helmet usage by motorcyclists, and construction of cycle tracks [21,29,35]. Furthermore, enforcing safety in workplaces is pivotal [22]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Facial injuries affect one-third of severely injured patients. These injuries have devastating long-term negative impacts on quality of life. We aimed to study the epidemiology of facial injuries and factors affecting the mortality of hospitalized facial trauma patients in Al-Ain City, United Arab Emirates. Methodology: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from Al-Ain Hospital Trauma Registry. All patients with facial injury who were hospitalized for more than 24 hours or who died after arrival at the hospital during the period from January 2014 to December 2017 were studied. Two sample data analysis was used to compare patients who died and those who survived. Significant factors were then entered into a backward logistic regression model to define factors affecting mortality. Results: 408 patients having a mean age of 31.9 years were studied, 87.3% were males. The main mechanisms of injury were road traffic collisions (52.2%) and fall from height (11.3%). 289 (70.8%) patients had associated injuries which were mainly in the head and chest. The backward logistic regression model showed that the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was the only factor that predicted mortality, p<0.0001 with the best cut-off point of 7.5, having a sensitivity of 0.972 and a specificity of 0.8. The ROC had an area under the curve of 0.924. Conclusion: The majority of facial injury patients in our setting are young males who were involved in road traffic collisions or falls from height. The most important factor predicting the mortality of these patients was the low GCS. Those having a GCS of 8 and more had a better chance of survival. This information is very important when counseling patients or their relatives for facial surgery.
... The planning, design, and operations of bicycle facilities are essential for making urban cycling a more efficient and attractive mode of transportation (Milakis et al. 2015). Planning and designing cycling infrastructure requires automated data collection technologies and methods to determine the performance of the existing network (Lusk et al. 2011;Strauss et al. 2013). As bicycle ridership grows, performance indicators that evaluate traffic conditions at bicycle facilities become increasingly crucial in the planning process (Strauss and Miranda-Moreno 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
Research on microscopic bicycle flow parameters (speed, headway, spacing, and density) is limited given the lack of methods to collect data in large quantities automatically. This paper introduces a novel methodology to compute bicycle flow parameters based on a LiDAR system composed of two single-beam sensors. Instantaneous mid-block raw speed for each cyclist in the traffic stream is measured using LiDAR sensor signals at seven bidirectional and three unidirectional cycling facilities. A Multilayer Perception Neural Network is proposed to improve the accuracy of speed measures. The LiDAR system computes the headway and spacing between consecutive cyclists using time-stamped detections and speed values. Estimation of density is obtained using spacing. For model calibration and testing, 101 hours of video data collected at ten mid-block sites are used. The performance of the cyclist speed estimation is evaluated by comparing it to ground truth video. When the dataset is randomly split into training and test sets, the RMSE and MAPE of the speed estimation method on the test set are 0.61 m/s and 7.1%, respectively. In another scenario, when the model is trained with nine of the ten sites and tested on data from the remaining site, the RMSE and MAPE are 0.69 m/s and 8.2%, respectively. Lastly, the relationships governing hourly flow rate, average speed, and estimated density are studied. The data were collected during the peak cycling season at high-flow sites in Montreal, Canada; However, none of the facilities reached or neared capacity.
... However, in the USA, facilities such as bicycle tracks are risky. Previous studies indicate cyclists are 3 to 4 times at higher risk on segments on-street than segments with offstreet bicycle lanes (Lusk et al. (2011);Pulugurtha & Thakur, 2015). Yet, the most extensive Canadian study on cycling injuries led by Ryerson University suggests cyclists are at risk of injury due to the lack of cycling infrastructure in large urban centres (Ryerson University, 2013). ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
Bicycle lanes reduce real and perceived risks for bicycle vs. other vehicle road crashes, reducing the load of traffic injuries and contributing to better cycling participation. This study aims to evaluate the utilization rate of on-street bicycle lane (BL) among Malaysian cyclist and identify the risk that might happen to cyclists as a result of misuse of the BL. This study also conducted an online survey among the public to identify their perception of safety towards the visibility of on-street BL. Total six (6) locations of on-street BL was observed. Result found the number of cyclists uses a BL was lower. However, an observation also found motorist tend to use a bicycle lane during peak hour. Cyclist stated they feel unsafe when riding either at bicycle lane. This might due to observation show most of the motor vehicle prone to park and drive thru the bicycle lane. Some pedestrian use bicycle lane as a walkway or jogging path. Cyclist also agreed law regarding cyclist/lane need to be improved.
... As supported by our findings where "any bike lane" had a lower summary estimate than specifically protected bike lanes, this type of infrastructure does little to enhance participation in bike riding (Akar & Clifton, 2009;Michelle Daley & Rissel, 2011;J. Dill, 2009;Heesch et al., 2012;Twaddle et al., 2010), and places a person at a substantially higher risk of injury compared to riding a bike in a protected bike lane (Haileyesus et al., 2007;Lusk et al., 2011;Mehan et al., 2009). ...
Article
Riding a bike for transport purposes is an effective way to improve population and environmental health. Despite this, participation levels in many countries are low. Identifying the barriers and enablers to riding a bike for transport is essential to developing interventions that encourage bike riding. In this mixed-methods systematic review, we aimed to identify the perceived barriers and enablers to adults riding a bike for transport in Organisation for Economic Development (OECD) countries. A systematic database search was conducted to identify relevant peer-reviewed and grey literature. Fourty-five papers/reports met eligibility criteria. There were 34 barriers and 21 enablers identified. The leading barriers related to riding on the road alongside motor vehicles. Other factors identified included the provision and quality of cycling infrastructure, personal factors such as physical fitness, attitudinal factors such as community perceptions of cyclists, and environmental factors. While this review highlights the complexity of factors that influence the uptake of riding a bike for transport, many of the leading factors could be overcome through the provision of high-quality protected infrastructure for bike riders. Other interventions to address other known barriers and enablers are needed to increase the uptake of bike riding.
Article
Comfortable cycleways are key to the success of a cycling network. However, evaluating comfort on many cycleway links can prove challenging with regard to resource requirements. This paper evaluates cycling comfort using GPS- and accelerometer-equipped bicycles in Montréal, Laval, and Longueuil (Canada). The objective of the study was threefold. First, to present a framework for efficiently evaluating cycling comfort of many cycling infrastructure links (segments), by accounting for various sampling conditions (speed and cyclist characteristics). Second, we aimed to analyze how cycling comfort relates to cycling infrastructure type. Third, we sought to identify hot spots and cold spots of comfortable cycleway links within the study area. The results showed that the dynamic comfort index was significantly influenced by the characteristics of the cyclists themselves and by the speed at which they were traveling. Off-street bike paths were significantly less comfortable than shared lanes, bike lanes, and streets without cycling facilities. Laval had more than its share of high-comfort clusters, whereas Montréal had significantly more low-comfort clusters than its counterparts. These results should be used to improve cycleway planning and quality monitoring.
Article
Bicycle treatments are installed to elevate motorists’ awareness of the presence of bicyclists and to enhance bicycle safety and mobility. To date, no studies have compared the safety benefits of sharrows and protected- and conventional bike lanes, or intersection-level treatments like bike boxes and intersection-crossing pavement markings. One factor that limits bicycle safety research is the lack of adequate bicycle exposure data. For this study, a crowdsource app was used for estimating networkwide bicycle demand data for Portland, OR. Crash prediction models were developed for road segments and signalized intersections to associate bicycle treatment presence and type with crash frequency. Compared with the “no treatment” case, protected bike lanes (odds ratio [OR] = 0.032), sharrows (OR = 0.211), and conventional bike lanes (OR = 0.552) were safer for road segments. Signalized intersections where segment-level bicycle treatments exist at more than one of the intersecting roads were associated with higher crash frequency. Specifically, for signalized intersections with one conventional bike lane, with two conventional bike lanes, or with a conventional- and a protected bike lane, the respective CMFs were 1.94, 2.07, and 3.38. Signalized intersections with at least one bike box or intersection-crossing pavement markings experienced higher crash frequency than intersections with no treatments, however not necessarily in the approach where the treatment was located. The respective Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) were 1.39 and 1.76. The findings could guide practitioners in selecting bicycle treatments for segments, whereas the models for signalized intersections could identify intersections with high crash frequency that need safety improvements.
Article
Full-text available
The objective of this study is to describe the epidemiology of bicycle-related injuries among children and adolescents 18 years and younger on a national level. This is a retrospective analysis of data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System of the US Consumer Product Safety Commission for patients 18 years and younger who were seen in emergency departments (EDs) between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2005, for injuries received while operating a bicycle. During the 16-year study period, there were an estimated 6 228 700 individuals 18 years and younger treated in US EDs for bicycle-related injuries. Children with head injuries were more than 3 (relative risk, 3.63) times as likely to require hospitalization and were almost 6 (relative risk, 5.77) times more likely to have their injuries result in death. The large number of annual bicycle related-injuries is evidence that prevention of these injuries should remain an important area of bicycle safety research and practice.
Article
Objectives: (1) For crashes on a public road, to compare serious cyclist crashes involving a motor vehicle with cyclist crashes not involving a motor vehicle, in terms of threat to life and length of stay in hospital. (2) To determine the proportion of all serious crashes involving cyclists on public roads which are recorded by the police. (3) To determine the degree to which under-reporting of serious crashes involving cyclists and motor vehicles on public roads is associated with various demographic, environmental, and injury factors. Study design: Records for the period 1995–99, of cyclists seriously injured on a public road and hospitalised were linked to the traffic crash report (TCR) database maintained by Land Transport Safety Authority (LTSA). Results: Of the 2925 cyclist crashes on public roads, only 652 (22%) could be linked to a TCR. Of the crashes involving motor vehicles (n = 1033), only 562 (54%) could be linked to the LTSA database. Age, ethnicity, injury severity, and cumulative length of stay were the only variables that predicted whether hospitalised cycle crash cases were more likely to have a corresponding TCR. There were substantial numbers of cyclist only crashes which typically are not captured in the TCR database. Nine percent of these resulted in serious or worse injury (that is, International Classification of Diseases/abbreviated injury scale score of 3+) and 7% resulted in hospital stays greater than seven days. Conclusion: Greater effort and precision needs to be applied to routinely document the burden of cyclist crashes, especially cyclist only crashes.
Article
Congestion charging has become a high‐agenda theme in many urban environments, with a growing recognition of a need to commit more effort to establishing the impact that various charging regimes might have in reducing traffic congestion and, as a corollary, in raising revenue that can be used to re‐invest to improve transport infrastructure in general and public transport services in particular. In addition to the political commitment, a major challenge being faced is behavioural—a need to understand more fully the role that specific charging regimes might play. The paper investigates the potential influence of variable user charges in the freight distribution chain. A choice‐modelling framework is presented that identifies potential responses from the freight transport firm to distance‐based charging within the context of the wider spectrum of costs and benefits delivered in terms of travel time savings and increased trip time reliability.
Article
This article shows how the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany have made bicycling a safe, convenient and practical way to get around their cities. The analysis relies on national aggregate data as well as case studies of large and small cities in each country. The key to achieving high levels of cycling appears to be the provision of separate cycling facilities along heavily travelled roads and at intersections, combined with traffic calming of most residential neighbourhoods. Extensive cycling rights of way in the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany are complemented by ample bike parking, full integration with public transport, comprehensive traffic education and training of both cyclists and motor-ists, and a wide range of promotional events intended to generate enthusiasm and wide public support for cycling. In addition to their many pro-bike policies and programmes, the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany make driving expensive as well as inconvenient in central cities through a host of taxes and restrictions on car ownership, use and parking. Moreover, strict land-use policies foster compact, mixed-use developments that generate shorter and thus more bikeable trips. It is the coordinated implementation of this multi-faceted, mutually reinforcing set of policies that best explains the success of these three countries in promoting cycling. For comparison, the article portrays the marginal status of cycling in the UK and the USA, where only about 1% of trips are by bike.
Article
This analysis overcomes the known limitations of police and emergency room bicycle accident databases through use of a survey that asked cyclists to indicate their accident history as well as their regular commute route to work or school. By relating the route information of the 1604 respondents (52.5% of the distributed questionnaires) to facility attributes in a Geographic Information System, defensible estimates of travel exposure on roads, off-road paths and sidewalks were developed. The relative rates of collisions on the three different facility types were not statistically different from 1.0. The relative rates for falls and injuries suggest it is safest to cycle on-road followed by off-road paths and trails, and finally least safe on sidewalks. While there were no major injuries reported on sidewalks, the relative rate for these events on paths was greater than the rate for roads. The absolute event rates per bicycle kilometre were found to be between 10 and 41 times higher than similar rates for automobile travel. Results suggest a need to discourage sidewalk cycling, and to further investigate the safety of off-road paths/trails. The analysis also demonstrates the need for bicycle travel exposure information and the use of more than just collision databases for bicycle safety analysis.
Article
To provide evidence about the types of transportation infrastructure that support bicycling. Population-based survey with pictures to depict 16 route types. Metro Vancouver, Canada. 1402 adult current and potential cyclists, i.e., the "near market" for cycling (representing 31% of the population). Preference scores for each infrastructure type (scale from -1, very unlikely to use, to +1, very likely to use); current frequency of use of each infrastructure type (mean number of times/y). Descriptive statistics across demographic segments; multiple linear regression. Most respondents were likely or very likely to choose to cycle on the following broad route categories: off-street paths (71%-85% of respondents); physically separated routes next to major roads (71%); and residential routes (48%-65%). Rural roads (21%-49%) and routes on major streets (16%-52%) were least likely to be chosen. Within the broad categories, routes with traffic calming, bike lanes, paved surfaces, and no on-street parking were preferred, resulting in increases in likelihood of choosing the route from 12% to 37%. Findings indicate a marked disparity between preferred cycling infrastructure and the route types that were currently available and commonly used. This study provides evidence for urban planners about bicycling infrastructure designs that could lead to an increase in active transportation.
Article
To our knowledge, research has not been conducted on bicycle riding and weight control in comparison with walking. Our objective was to assess the association between bicycle riding and weight control in premenopausal women. This was a 16-year follow-up study of 18,414 women in the Nurses' Health Study II. Weight change between 1989 and 2005 was the primary outcome, and the odds of gaining more than 5% of baseline body weight by 2005 was the secondary outcome. At baseline, only 39% of participants walked briskly, while only 1.2% bicycled for more than 30 min/d. For a 30-min/d increase in activity between 1989 and 2005, weight gain was significantly less for brisk walking (-1.81 kg; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.05 to -1.56 kg), bicycling (-1.59 kg; 95% CI, -2.09 to -1.08 kg), and other activities (-1.45 kg; 95% CI, -1.66 to -1.24 kg) but not for slow walking (+0.06 kg; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.35 kg). Women who reported no bicycling in 1989 and increased to as little as 5 min/d in 2005 gained less weight (-0.74 kg; 95% CI, -1.41 to -0.07 kg; P value for trend, <.01) than those who remained nonbikers. Normal-weight women who bicycled more than 4 h/wk in 2005 had a lower odds of gaining more than 5% of their baseline body weight (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.98) compared with those who reported no bicycling; overweight and obese women had a lower odds at 2 to 3 h/wk (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.86). Bicycling, similar to brisk walking, is associated with less weight gain and an inverse dose-response relationship exists, especially among overweight and obese women. Future research should focus on brisk walking and greater time spent bicycling.
Article
We used coroners' records to investigate the fatal accidents of cyclists recorded on death certificates in London during 1985-1992. There were 124 deaths: 68 cyclists were injured in London and 56 injured in the "home counties" around London and died in London hospitals. The cyclists' ages were from 8-88, and 70% were male; the drivers were aged 17-74, and 96% were male. Of the 108 vehicles involved, 53 were cars (including one parked) and 40 heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) (including 14 large lorries and 18 articulated lorries), 5 light goods vehicles, 5 buses and coaches and 5 motorcycles. Fatal accidents occurred with a wide range of manoeuvres; of vehicles turning left (driving is on the left in the U.K.), 14 out of 15 were HGVs. Accidents were most often on 2 lane roads and one half were near a road junction. Law violations were recorded in half the accidents; alcohol intoxication contributed only rarely. While injuries to the head were the commonest reported direct cause of death, Inner London deaths were frequently due to multiple injuries. The study confirms the serious danger to cyclists (particularly women) in Inner London from large and articulated lorries, causing death from multiple injuries.