Stakeholders’ Opinions on a Future In-Vehicle Alcohol Detection System for Prevention of Drunk Driving

References

• Åkerstedt T, Connor J, Gray A, Kecklund G. Predicting road crashes from a mathematical model of alertness regulation—the sleep/wake predictor. Accid Anal Prev. 2008;40:1480–1485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beirness D, Marques P. Alcohol ignition interlock programs. Traffic Inj Prev. 2004;5:299–308.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bjerre B, Kostela J. Primary prevention of drink driving by the large-scale use of alcolocks in commercial vehicles. Accid Anal Prev. 2008;40:1294–1299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blomberg R, Peck R, Moskowitz H, Burns M, Fiorentino D. Crash Risk of Alcohol Involved Driving: A Case-Control Study. Stamford, CT: Dunlap and Associates; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Chipman M, Jin YL. Drowsy drivers: the effect of light and circadian rhythm on crash occurrence. Saf Sci. 2009;47:1364–1370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins E, Dickson N, Eynon C, Kinver A, MacLeod P. Drinking and Driving 2007: Prevalence, Decision Making and Attitudes. Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Government Social Research, TNS System Three; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Compton R, Hedlund J. Reducing Impaired-Driving Recidivism Using Advanced Vehicle-Based Alcohol Detection Systems: A Report to the Congress. Washington, DC: Department of Transport; 2007. DOT HS 810 876.
   Google Scholar
• Elder RW. Effectiveness of ignition interlocks for preventing alcohol-impaired driving and alcohol-related crashes—a community guide systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40:362–376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans L. Traffic Safety and the Driver. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson S. Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS). Background and Rationale for Technology Approaches. Warrendale, PA: SAE; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson S. Alcohol-impaired driving in the United States: contributors to the problem and the effective countermeasures. Traffic Inj Prev. 2012;13:427–441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsman Å. Riskkurva för Alkhol. Studie Baserad på Omkomna Personbilsförare i Sverige [Risk curve for alcohol. A study based on killed passenger car drivers in Sweden]. Linköping, Sweden: VTI; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Frey J, Fontana A. The group interview in social research. Soc Sci J. 1991;28(2):175–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyde A, Howlett E, Brady D, Drennan J. The focus group method: insights from focus group interviews on sexual health with adolescents. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61:2588–2599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Road Traffic and Accident Database. Road Safety Annual Report 2013. Brussels, Belgium: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/International Transport Forum; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson R. Vison Zero—implementing a policy for traffic safety. Saf Sci. 2009;47:826–831.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson M, Clapp J. Impact of providing drinkers with “know your limit” information on drinking and driving: a field experiment. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2011;72:79–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones A. The drunkest drinking driver in Sweden: blood alcohol concentration 0.545% w/v. J Stud Alcohol. 1999;60:400–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplowitz M, Hoehn J. Do focus groups and individual interviews reveal the same information for natural resource valuation? Ecol Econ. 2001;36:237–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreuger R. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Lahausse J, Fildes B. Cost–benefit analysis of an alcohol ignition interlock for installation in all newly registered vehicles. Traffic Inj Prev. 2009;10:528–537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massey O. A proposed model for the analysis and interpretation of focus groups in evaluation research. Eval Program Plann. 2011;34:21–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCartt A, Wells J, Teoh E. Attitudes toward in-vehicle advanced alcohol detection technology. Traffic Inj Prev. 2010;11:156–164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrum G, Blackstock K, Matthews K, Rivington M, Miller D, Buchan K. Adapting to climate change in land management: the role of deliberative workshops in enhancing social learning. Environmental Policy and Governance 2009;19:413–426.
   Google Scholar
• Michon J. A critical view of driver behaviour models: what do we know, what should we do? In: Evans L, Schwing R, eds. Human Behaviour and Traffic Safety. New York, NY: Plenum Pres; 1985:485–520.
   Google Scholar
• Moretti F, Van Vliet L, Bensing J, et al. A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;82:420–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nåbo A, Anund A, Fors C, Karlsson J. Drivers Reasoning About Automated Driving in the Future. A Focus Group Study. Linköping: VTI; 2013. VTI Report R788.
   Google Scholar
• Näätänen R, Summala H, eds. Road-User Behaviour and Traffic Accidents. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Ohayon MM. From wakefulness to excessive sleepiness: what we know and still need to know. Sleep Med. 2008;12(2):129–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker A, Tritter J. Focus group method and methodology: current practice and recent debate. International Journal of Research & Method in Education. 2006;29:23–37.
   Google Scholar
• Portman M, Penttilä A, Haukka J, et al. Profile of a drunk driver and risk factors for drunk driving. Findings in roadside testing in the province of Uusimaa in Finland 1990–2008. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;231(1–3):20–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radun J, Radun I, Summala H. Drinking and driving “safely”: who uses a breathalyzer and when? Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 2009;12(2):155–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rakow L. Commentary: interviews and focus groups as critical and cultural methods. Journal Mass Commun Q. 2011;88:416–428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranney T. Models of driving behaviour: a review of their evolution. Accid Anal Prev. 1994;26:733–750.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheff T. Microsociology, Discourse, Emotion and Social Structure. Chicago, IL: Oxford Journals; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Scott A. Focusing in on focus groups: effective participative tools or cheap fixes for land use policy? Land Use Policy. 2011;28:684–694.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seidman I, ed. Interviewing as Qualitative Research. New York: NY: Teachers College Press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Silverans P, Alvarez J, et al. Alcolock Implementation in the European Union. Deliverable D-2: Description, Results and Discussion of the Alcolock Field Trial. Brussels, Belgium: BIVV/IBSR Belgian Road Safety Institute; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson M. Strategier för Ökad Regelefterlevnad på Trafikområdet, Lagstiftning, Polisiärt Arbete och Sanktioner [Strategies for increased compliance in the area of traffic, legislation, law enforcement and sanctions]. Lund, Sweden: 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Wickens C. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Harper Collins; 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Williams LR, Davies DR, Thiele K, Davidson JR, MacLean AW. Young drivers’ perceptions of culpability of sleep-deprived versus drinking drivers. J Safety Res. 2012;43(2):115–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zador P, Ahlin E, Rauch W, Howard J, Duncana D. The effects of closer monitoring on driver compliance with interlock restrictions. Accid Anal Prev. 2011;43:1960–1967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar