Hundreds of injured London cyclists to be questioned as part of cycling safety research project

Just mandate collision avoidance tech, 360degree cameras and black box tracking in all new motorized transport now and watch road KSI figures drop year on year as it rolls out. If cars are designed to avoid crashing despite driver input to the contrary everyone will be safer on the roads.

Oldstrath

Yes you're right to provide any useful answers the data collected by the hospital would have to be combined with data sets held elsewhere or perhaps a project run to collect the data.  But my point is (perhaps badly expressed) that the collection of all the data about incidents should be a neutral activity.  If we are going to have policy and laws based around fact rather than anecdotage and opinion, data is required.   I would agree that you also have to be vigilant that the data is collected carefully and used even more carefully to ensure it yields the answers we need, i.e. what actually makes the roads safe for everyone.

Myself I hope somebody proves that Hi Viz is a waste of time, but I  suspect that in certain low light conditions it probably helps a bit.

It appears to me they are attempting to accumulate information and habits of the cyclist to enforce the use of helmets / Hi visibility, and bring in laws banning the use of earphones whicle cycling. 

So if that is the case then introduce laws which enforce only Dayglow coloured cars, ban car stereo's and enforce the use of a helmet while driving. ( there are more head injuries in vehicle accidents than there are in bicycle accidents )

I wouldn't be surpirsed if it wasn't being funded by some anti cycling organisation, some London transport company or even UKIP.

It might feel like victim blaming asking if you were wearing Hi-Viz but the only way you'll prove if it's effective or otherwise is by collecting this kind of data.  But I'd agree that data on the otherside of the collision needs to be collected as well but I suspect that A & E doctors don't often get to interview the vehicle driver.

“We also hope that this ... could have a real impact on accident prevention and the management of cycling injuries.”
 

I don't see how this could prevent "accidents" in a significant way as they seem to be focussed on the injured cyclists rather than the people who cause most of the "accidents"?

By only including people who attend A&E, it excludes people who have been hit but not seriously injured, or who know that only time will cure their injuries (ribs, fingers, facial bones, elbow injuries for instance) .

Skewing the intake will skew the data.  Won't that make it less useful?

Reported some bellends that tried to hit me with their car in Edinburgh yesterday while shouting and laughing out the window. Don't think that's what the site if for but whatever, maybe can help build up a picture of what it's like to ride around the city.

The questionnire DOES ask for details of any other vehicle involved and also whether the incident happened in the road or on a segregated bike path etc.

It then asks you to describe the incident. It doesn't appear to ask you explicitly what you were wearing.

I'd be more interested if they asked about the other vehicle involved in the collision as well. Was a driver talking on a mobile phone? Were they speeding? Did they execute a maneouvre without checking mirrors or indicating?

I'm surprised they're asking about helmets as surely anyone not wearing a helmet would just be outright killed immediately (or unfundamented).

Interesting selection of questions. If I'd been injured and was asked these questions, I'd have a slight feeling that the person asking them suspected or was implying that the injury was my own fault. I'd find that somewhat irksome if someone had knocked me off my bike through negligent driving of a motor vehicle and caused me an injury serious enough to be in A&E.

I wonder why they don't ask what other types of vehicles (if any) were involved, and other such questions? Or perhaps it's just the potentially victim blaming questions that Road.cc have included in their article?