Development of a Theoretically Grounded, Web-Based Intervention to Reduce Adolescent Driver Inattention.
Catherine C McDonald, Bridgette M Brawner, Jamison Fargo and 2 others
PMID 28553750WHAT IT FOUND
The teen driver web program was feasible: all who started completed it, but no driving outcomes were reported, so it does not show reduced inattention.
Key findings
01The paper reports development and feasibility, not effects: it states it will not report intervention effects and Phase III focuses on feasibility rather than outcomes.
02Every teen who started either intervention completed the online activities, and retention was 96.7% at the one-month visit, 91.6% at three months, and 93.3% at six months.
03In Phase I, 96.7% of the 30 adolescents said texting while driving was bad or very bad, but 46.7% reported texting while driving in the past 30 days.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The paper reports no driving outcomes, so it cannot show the program changed behavior or crash risk. The authors explicitly say they are not reporting intervention effects, and Phase III is presented only as feasibility testing. The focus group, beta, and pilot samples were small. The Phase III sample was mostly White and reported no Hispanic ethnicity, and participants were Pennsylvania drivers licensed for 90 days or less. The intervention was self-paced online with no study team interaction, so it does not test nurse-delivered education.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that the web program reduces teen driver inattention or crashes. The authors say they are not reporting intervention effects, and the Phase III randomized study is presented only as feasibility testing.