IP

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sapien, R E
Right arrow Articles by Fullerton-Gleason, L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sapien, R E
Right arrow Articles by Fullerton-Gleason, L
Inj Prev 2003;9:87-88
© 2003 BMJ Publishing Group


BRIEF REPORT

Children’s response to a commercial back-up warning device

R E Sapien, J Widman Roux, L Fullerton-Gleason

Department of Emergency Medicine, University of New Mexico Health Science Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico

Correspondence to:
Dr Robert E Sapien, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of New Mexico Health Science Center, ACC 4th Floor West, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA;
rsapien{at}salud.unm.edu


ABSTRACT
Objective: To determine preschool children’s response to a commercial back-up warning alarm in a mock setting of an automobile backing up.

Setting: Preschool parking lot in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.

Methods: With subjects acting as their own controls, 33 preschoolers were asked to walk behind a stationary vehicle twice. The first time, the control, no warning sound was emitted from the vehicle. The second time, the vehicle was placed in reverse gear triggering an alarm. Children’s responses were recorded by a hidden video camera. Avoidance behavior by the child was considered a positive response. Location and distance to where the response occurred was measured.

Results: Thirty three children, 38–61 months, were studied. None responded to the alarm with avoidance behavior but 18 looked toward the vehicle or hesitated in their gait.

Conclusion: Although over half of the children acknowledged the warning alarm, the device did not elicit avoidance behavior. Mere acknowledgment of the warning device would not prevent injury.


Keywords: non-traffic pedestrian injuries; driveway crush injuries; pediatric pedestrian




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
AAP Grand RoundsHome page
D. R. Focht III
Do Motor Vehicle Back-Up Warning Devices Protect Young Children?
AAP Grand Rounds, July 1, 2003; 10(1): 8 - 9.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2003 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.