Study of an assessment tool for risky road behavior tendencies among middle school students in western China and indicator weights
-
摘要:
目的 构建中国西部中学生道路危险行为倾向评估工具并确定其中各项指标及其权重, 为中国西部中学生道路安全防控提供参考。 方法 对编制的中国西部中学生道路危险行为倾向评估工具采用德尔菲专家咨询法, 2023年8月邀请交通安全、教育、医疗等相关领域的18名专家参加咨询, 根据咨询结果先筛选指标, 再通过层次分析法确定各指标权重及组合权重。 结果 最终评估工具共包括3个一级指标、13个二级指标和100个三级指标。专家积极系数为100%, 专家平均权威系数0.90;3个一级指标的重要性评分均数为4.67~4.78, 13个二级指标的重要性评分均数为4.22~4.89;Kendall协调系数W为0.32, 有统计学意义(χ2=96.83, P < 0.05)。3个一级指标的权重分别为能力(0.329 4)、机会(0.337 3)、动机(0.333 3);二级指标组合权重排在前3位的依次为社会影响(0.027 4)、知识(0.027 3)与技能(0.026 7)。 结论 中国西部中学生道路危险行为倾向评估工具专家认可度较高, 且一级和二级指标权重及组合权重较为均等。未来可扩大使用范围, 为开展干预工作提供数据支撑。 Abstract:Objective To develop an assessment tool for risky road behavior tendencies among middle school students in western China, as well as to determine the relevant indices and their weights, so as to provide the reference for road safety prevention and control for middle school students in western China. Methods A Delphi study was employed to construct the assessment tool for risky road behavior tendencies among middle school students in western China. In August 2023, eighteen experts in related fields such as traffic safety, education, and healthcare were invited to achieve Delphi consensus. The final indices were initially selected based on the consulting results, followed by the determination of their individual and combined weights using the analytic hierarchy process. Results The finalized assessment tool comprised 3 primary indicators, 13 secondary indicators, and 100 tertiary indicators. The positivity coefficient of experts was 100%, accompanied by the authority coefficient 0.90. The mean importance scores for the three primary indicators varied from 4.67 to 4.78, while those for the 13 secondary indicators ranged from 4.22 to 4.89. The Kendall coefficient W was statistically significant at 0.32 (χ2=96.83, P < 0.05). The weights assigned to the three primary indicators were: ability (0.329 4), opportunity (0.337 3), and motivation (0.333 3). The secondary indicators with the top three highest combined weights were social influence (0.027 4), knowledge (0.027 3), and skills (0.026 7). Conclusions The assessment tool for risky road behavior tendencies among middle school students in western China demonstrates high expert consensus, with balanced weighting of primary and secondary indicators. Expanded use of the assessment tool would provide the data support for intervention work. -
Key words:
- Dangerous behavior /
- Accidents, traffic /
- Delphi technique /
- Students
1) 利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突。 -
表 1 专家对评估工具一级指标的层次分析判断矩阵
Table 1. Expert's analytic hierarchy process for judgment matrix on primary indicators of assessment tools
一级指标 能力 机会 动机 能力 1.000 0.977 0.989 机会 1.024 1.000 1.013 动机 1.011 0.987 1.000 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 中学生道路危险行为倾向评估工具一二级指标重要性评分、变异系数和权重
Table 2. Importance scores, coefficient of variation and weights for primary and secondary indicators of the tool on assessing student's dangerous behaviors tendencies on the road
一级指标 二级指标 评分 变异系数 权重 组合权重 能力 4.67±0.59 0.13 0.329 4 — 知识 4.89±0.32 0.07 0.082 9 0.027 3 技能 4.78±0.55 0.11 0.081 1 0.026 7 记忆、注意力和决策过程 4.61±0.61 0.13 0.078 2 0.025 8 行为调节 4.44±0.86 0.19 0.075 4 0.024 8 机会 4.78±0.43 0.09 0.337 3 — 社会影响 4.78±0.55 0.11 0.081 1 0.027 4 环境背景与资源 4.61±0.70 0.15 0.078 2 0.026 4 动机 4.72±0.58 0.12 0.333 3 — 社会/专业角色和身份 4.22±0.81 0.19 0.071 6 0.023 9 能力信念 4.67±0.49 0.10 0.079 2 0.026 4 结果信念 4.28±0.83 0.19 0.072 6 0.024 2 乐观主义 4.28±0.83 0.19 0.072 6 0.024 2 动机与目标 4.50±0.71 0.16 0.076 3 0.025 4 情绪 4.50±0.79 0.17 0.076 3 0.025 4 强化 4.39±0.85 0.19 0.074 5 0.024 8 注：评分采用(x±s)描述。
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] LIU L, VILLAVICENCIO F, YEUNG D, et al. National, regional, and global causes of mortality in 5-19-year-olds from 2000 to 2019: a systematic analysis[J]. Lancet Glob Health, 2022, 10(3): e337-e347. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00566-0 [2] 徐梦蕾, 王书梅. 儿童及青少年出行安全与交通伤害预防[J]. 上海预防医学, 2021, 33(9): 861-868.XU M L, WANG S M. Road safety and traffic injury prevention in children and adolescents[J]. Shanghai J Prev Med, 2021, 33(9): 861-868. (in Chinese) [3] LIU Y N, CHU Y, YEUNG D N, et al. National and sub-national levels and causes of mortality among 5-19-year-old in China in 2004-2019: a systematic analysis of evidence from the disease surveillance points system[J]. J Glob Health, 2022, 12: 11008. doi: 10.7189/jogh.12.11008 [4] 李粉粉, 王书梅, 叶周丰, 等. 某职业高中学生危险交通行为与交通伤害相关性研究[J]. 伤害医学(电子版), 2019, 8(3): 30-35.LI F F, WANG S M, YE Z F, et al. The correlations between risky traffic behaviors and traffic injuries among students in a vocational high school[J]. Inj Med(Electron Ed), 2019, 8(3): 30-35. (in Chinese) [5] USECHE S A, ALONSO F, MONTORO L, et al. When age means safety: data to assess trends and differences on rule knowledge, risk perception, aberrant and positive road behaviors, and traffic crashes of cyclists[J]. Data Brief, 2019, 22: 627-634. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2018.12.066 [6] 公安部道路交通安全研究中心, 中国疾病预防控制中心慢性非传染性疾病预防控制中心. 中国儿童道路交通伤害状况研究报告[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2014.Research Institute for Road Safety of MPS, National Center for Chronic and Noncommunicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Research report on the status of road traffic injuries among children in China[M]. Beijing: People's Medical Publishing House, 2014. (in Chinese) [7] 纪翠蓉, 邓晓, 叶鹏鹏, 等. 2018年云南省红河州蒙自市中小学生通学道路交通伤害发生状况调查[J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2019, 40(11): 1381-1382.JI C R, DENG X, YE P P, et al. Road traffic injury happened on the way to school, among primary and secondary school students in Mengzi City, Honghe Prefecture, Yunnan Province in 2018[J]. Chin J Epidemiol, 2019, 40(11): 1381-1382. (in Chinese) [8] 白建权. 大理市半寄宿制中学校园周边学生交通事故的调查及预防研究[D]. 昆明: 云南师范大学, 2020.BAI J Q. Investigation and prevention research on students' traffic accidents in semi-boarding middle school campus of Dali City[D]. Kunming: Yunnan Normal University, 2020. (in Chinese) [9] 张天成, 张福兰, 陆盛华, 等. 武陵山区少数民族青少年健康危险行为及聚集模式分析[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2020, 41(6): 840-844. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2020.06.011ZHANG T C, ZHANG F L, LU S H, et al. Health risk behaviors and cluster patterns of adolescents from four minorities in rural Wuling Mountainous Area[J]. Chin J Sch Health, 2020, 41(6): 840-844. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2020.06.011 [10] 柏晓迪, 蒋运兰, 徐婷, 等. 基于中文文献的青少年伤害相关行为流行特征的Meta分析[J/OL]. 上海预防医学, 2024: 1-9[2024-09-12]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/31.1635.r.20240814.1717.002.html .BAI X D, JIANG Y L, XU T, et al. A Meta-analysis of the prevalence characteristics of injury-related behaviors among adolescents based on Chinese literature[J/OL]. Shanghai J Prev Med, 2024: 1-9[2024-09-12].http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/31.1635.r.20240814.1717.002.html . (in Chinese)[11] ELLIOTT M A, BAUGHAN C J. Developing a self-report method for investigating adolescent road user behaviour[J]. Transp Res F Traffic Psychol Behav, 2004, 7(6): 373-393. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2004.10.002 [12] FEENSTRA H, RUITER R A, KOK G. Social-cognitive correlates of risky adolescent cycling behavior[J]. BMC Public Health, 2010, 10(1): 408. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-408 [13] TWISK D, VLAKVELD W, MESKEN J, et al. Inexperience and risky decisions of young adolescents, as pedestrians and cyclists, in interactions with lorries, and the effects of competency versus awareness education[J]. Accid Anal Prev, 2013, 55: 219-225. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.038 [14] JIANG K, LING F, FENG Z, et al. Psychological predictors of mobile phone use while crossing the street among college students: an application of the theory of planned behavior[J]. Traffic Inj Prev, 2017, 18(2): 118-123. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2016.1236195 [15] PIAZZA A J, KNOWLDEN A P, HIBBERD E, et al. Mobile device use while crossing the street: utilizing the theory of planned behavior[J]. Accid Anal Prev, 2019, 127: 9-18. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.02.006 [16] JIANG K, YANG Z, FENG Z, et al. Mobile phone use while cycling: a study based on the theory of planned behavior[J]. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav, 2019, 64: 388-400. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2019.05.020 [17] MOSHKI M, KHAJAVI A, SADEGHI-GHYASSI F, et al. Measurement properties of self-report pedestrians' road crossing behavior questionnaires constructed based on the theory of planned behavior: protocol for a systematic review[J]. Syst Rev, 2019, 8(1): 192. doi: 10.1186/s13643-019-1121-6 [18] World Health Organization. Save lives: a road safety technical package[M]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2017. [19] MICHIE S, JOHNSTON M, ABRAHAM C, et al. Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach[J]. Qual Saf Health Care, 2005, 14(1): 26-33. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.011155 [20] MICHIE S, VAN STRALEN M M, WEST R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions[J]. Implement Sci, 2011, 6: 42. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-42 [21] 张科, 王鼎, 张秋玲, 等. 基于德尔菲法的东北地区重大慢病防控科技综合示范基地评价指标体系构建及应用[J]. 中国卫生统计, 2022, 39(6): 912-914, 918.ZHANG K, WANG D, ZHANG Q L, et al. Construction and application of an evaluation index system for a comprehensive demonstration base for major chronic disease prevention and control in northeast China based on the Delphi method[J]. Chin J Health Stat, 2022, 39(6): 912-914, 918. (in Chinese) [22] 周壹文, 顾莺, 余卓文, 等. 实施科学中行为改变理论框架的发展与衍变的范围综述[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2023, 23(6): 715-724.ZHOU Y W, GU Y, YU Z W, et al. The development and evolution of theoretical frameworks for behavior change in the implementation science: a scoping review[J]. Chin J Evid Based Med, 2023, 23(6): 715-724. (in Chinese) [23] 陈勃昊, 薛城, 王书梅, 等. 基于德尔菲法的公共卫生事件中家庭服务需求指标体系构建[J]. 复旦学报(医学版), 2022, 49(1): 60-65, 72.CHEN B H, XUE C, WANG S M, et al. The construction of the family service needs index system(FSNIS) in public health events based on Delphi method[J]. Fudan Univ J Med Sci, 2022, 49(1): 60-65, 72. (in Chinese) [24] 殷小雅, 陈勃昊, 朱莹, 等. 德尔菲法构建儿童伤害预防家庭监护能力评估指标体系[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2022, 43(7): 1086-1089, 1094. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2022.07.030YIN X Y, CHEN B H, ZHU Y, et al. Development of index system for assessing parent's ability on child injury prevention by Delphi consultation[J]. Chin J Sch Health, 2022, 43(7): 1086-1089, 1094. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2022.07.030 [25] 丁晋飞, 谈立峰, 汤在祥, 等. 德尔菲法及其在公共卫生领域的应用和展望[J]. 环境与职业医学, 2012, 29(11): 727-730.DING J F, TAN L F, TANG Z X, et al. Delphi method in public health: a review of its application and prospect[J]. J Environ Occup Med, 2012, 29(11): 727-730. (in Chinese) [26] HUIJG J M, GEBHARDT W A, CRONE M R, et al. Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research[J]. Implement Sci, 2014, 9(1): 11. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-11 [27] BARTON B K, SCHWEBEL D C. The roles of age, gender, inhibitory control, and parental supervision in children's pedestrian safety[J]. J Pediatr Psychol, 2007, 32(5): 517-526. [28] OLÁH K, KIRÁLY I. Young children selectively imitate models conforming to social norms[J]. Front Psychol, 2019, 10: 1399. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01399 [29] DAHL R E. Biological, developmental, and neurobehavioral factors relevant to adolescent driving risks[J]. Am J Prev Med, 2008, 35(3): S278-S284. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.06.013 [30] CHATER A M, BROOK-ROWLAND P, TOLANI F, et al. Understanding a constellation of eight COVID-19 disease prevention behaviours using the COM-B model and the theoretical domains framework: a qualitative study using the behaviour change wheel[J]. Front Public Health, 2023, 11: 1130875. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1130875 [31] ALONSO F, GONZALEZ-MARIN A, ESTEBAN C, et al. Behavioral health at school: do three competences in road safety education impact the protective road behaviors of Spanish children?[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2020, 17(3): 935. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17030935 [32] 马艺函, 胡明. 道路安全健康教育应用进展[J]. 伤害医学(电子版), 2022, 11(2): 53-62.MA Y H, HU M. Progress on application of health education for road traffic injuries[J]. Inj Med(Electron Ed), 2022, 11(2): 53-62. (in Chinese) -
点击查看大图
表(2)
计量
- 文章访问数: 46
- HTML全文浏览量: 26
- PDF下载量: 7
- 被引次数: 0
