Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Australian Motorcycle Accident In-Depth Study (AusMAIDS)

Discussion in 'Research, Studies, and Data' started by Buckets, Sep 5, 2012.

  1. Do you ride a motorcycle or scooter IN NSW?

    Would you be willing to take part in a survey about your experiences as a rider?

    Please help us to help other riders.

    The Australian Motorcycle Accident In-Depth Study (AusMAIDS) is a using the internationally agreed Case Control methodology for in-depth motorcycle crash investigations. This means that for every crashed rider (Case), 2 or 3 other riders (Controls) are included from other motorcyclists who have ridden near the crash site.

    Controls will be asked to complete an anonymous on-line survey about their riding experience, practices and background.

    Who can take part?

    Any licensed motorcycle rider, aged 18 or older who has ridden in a specified area near one of the following crash sites can take part in this study.

    To register to take part in the study please call 02 9399 1115

    Location Number Street Between Town
    1 Wheatley Road Giles St and Roebourne St Yarrawarrah
    2 Pittwater Road Mona Vale Rd and Turimetta St Church Point
    3 Victoria Road Fitzgerald Rd and Brush Rd Ermington
    4 Newcastle Expressway Kuring-gai and Mt White exits Cowan
    5 Davies Road Watson Rd and Bridge St Padstow
    6 Dunmore Street Jones St and Pendle Way Pendle Hill
    7 Warringah Road Starkey St and Melwood Av Forestville
    8 Pacific Highway Bouvardia St and Amor St Cowan
    9 Parker Street Coreen Ave and Peachtree Rd Kingswood
    10 Boundary Road Gill Ave and Calabro Ave Liverpool
    11 Frederick Street Watkin St and Railway St Rockdale

    Who is conducting this study?

    The study is being conducted by Neuroscience Research Australia, in collaboration with Monash University Accident Research Centre (Victoria) and the Centre for Automotive Safety Research at the University of Adelaide, South Australia. The project is funded by AustRoads (Association of Australian and New Zealand Road Authorities).

    The study has been approved by The University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Advisory Committee (HREC12043).
    Any person with concerns or complaints about the conduct of this study should contact the Ethics Secretariat, The University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052 Australia. Telephone (02) 9385 4234, Fax (02) 9385 6648 or email ethics.sec@unsw.edu.au
  2. Ahhh Muarc: Massively Unscientific Australian Road Calumniators.
  3. Suggest to consult with Robsalvv on this particular survey (guessing you know that though).
  4. This study is being done in NSW by NUERA. The following is a response from the Head of the Study Julie Browne with regards to concerns about MUARC. MUARC are involved in peer reviewing the study... not involved in running the study at all.

  5. I can understand why a neuroscience team would want to understand what happens IF we crash, but they should have no interest in WHY we crash.

    the answer to this one is so simple that it doesn't need a survey. to prevent and minimise injury to motorcyclists, all we need is for car drivers to not hit us.
  6. Maybe they are interested in stuff like like environmental factors. Or maybe it's about perception.
    Doesn't explain why it is being done, but that might affect self-selection biases (?)
    Honestly, it doesn't look in the least dodgy, unless I'm missing something.
  7. what utter nonsense, the usual 'they are always at fault' stuff that brings out the bleating car/police/everyone-else haters here on Netrider.

    Why would they want to know WHY we crash? Well leaving apart that drugs/alcohol/testosterone and a feeling of innate superiority leads to impaired judgment, perhaps at least stupidity, which elicts such comments above, might also be of interest to them.......
    • Like Like x 1
  8. G'day Buckets, when I saw this pop up on the forums I was curious about it - just been a bit busy to post up about it.

    I'm all for genuine research and its data being made available, so I hope the study is well designed and robust. We need good fairdinkum data - too much of the data being used by the safetycrats is authoritycentric serving their own purposes - so bring on the honest studies!

    Dunno if you can cast some light on the following, but I'm genuinely interested to know:

    The name is curious, AusMAIDS when it's really a NSW centric study. What's your view about that?

    Also, it seems to be a study where you register to participate which is odd. How is that a robust control? Can I sign up if I've ridden through NSW at any time?

    If it's truly a "sign up to participate" model, how are UNSW controlling for selection bias?

    Is the list you've included in your OP, the areas of interest at this point?

    Are they looking for case controls for those locations?

    Is there a time limit on when riders went through those locations?

    Have you guys had any input into the questions?

    Do you know what the key dimension of the study is? Are they testing for the influence of speed, or skill, or bike condition or weather etc etc.

    Down here in Vic, MUARC are in the midst of their own case controlled motorcycle crash study, which is possibly a great stroke of luck with two studies going at the same time. Hopefully that means in a year or two, both Vic and NSW will have some solid data to explore.

    The MUARC Vic study has speed as its key dimension and is analysing for what the protective factors are and whether speed is even a significant player. It had to be speed related to get the funding - all the authorities are focussed on speed - so it's worth knowing what the dimensions and parameters of the NSW study are. One of the apparent differences is that MUARC's study will recruit controls along the route that includes the crash location at some time shortly after the crash has been recorded. That way the input from the control is fresh, timely and relevant. Do you know if the AusMAIDS study is doing the same??
  9. my comment may have been flippant but my negativity has basis. When has any rider or driver survey been used to the benefit of riders? in any country let alone here. Specifically I cannot see how a case control study can result in anything except negative outcomes for us. To take your first example consider this:

    case A - drunk rider crashes
    control B - sober rider doesn't crash
    conclusion - alcohol impairs the abilities of motorcyclists
    result - zero bac for motorcyclists.


    case B - rider fails to negotiate bend at the speed limit
    control B - rider safely negotiated bend below speed limit
    conclusion - speed limit is too high
    result - lowered speed limit

    and your second example is EXACTLY why TAC and Vicpol do not support advanced driver and rider training even in the face of international experiences to the contrary

    you KNOW the government will spin the results to suit their agenda even if the motives of Neura are good. Why continue to give them the ammunition?
  10. from the Neura web site

    make you own mind up how the outcome of this study will be used. It doesn't sound to me like they are looking for a neurosciences input to the crashes but rather how the result of the crash can be minimised on the nervous system. It's also pretty much at a tangent to the majority of Neura's advertised research.
  11. pass ..
  12. Question #

    when you crashed your motorcycle were you observing the posted speed limit ........Yes

    Do you believe if you were traveling at a slower speed .Say 40kph you would have a better chance of avoiding the crash. .

    'well mmmmm yes But .

    hah hah ok fantastic I'll let the government know lower speed limits is the answer

    thanks for taking part in the in-depth study =D>