<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=PHNlYXJjaD48cGFyYW1zPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJkYXRlaW4iIHZhbHVlPSJhbGwiIC8+PHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9InN1YmplY3Rsb2dpYyIgdmFsdWU9Im9yIiAvPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJ0ZXJtc2xvZ2ljIiB2YWx1ZT0ib3IiIC8+PHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9ImxvY2F0aW9uIiB2YWx1ZT0iMCIgLz48L3BhcmFtcz48ZmlsdGVycz48ZmlsdGVyIGZpZWxkPSJpbmRleHRlcm1zIiB2YWx1ZT0iJnF1b3Q7Q2hpbGQgc2FmZXR5JnF1b3Q7IiBvcmlnaW5hbF92YWx1ZT0iJnF1b3Q7Q2hpbGQgc2FmZXR5JnF1b3Q7IiAvPjwvZmlsdGVycz48cmFuZ2VzIC8+PHNvcnRzPjxzb3J0IGZpZWxkPSJwdWJsaXNoZWQiIG9yZGVyPSJkZXNjIiAvPjwvc29ydHM+PHBlcnNpc3RzPjxwZXJzaXN0IG5hbWU9InJhbmdldHlwZSIgdmFsdWU9InB1Ymxpc2hlZGRhdGUiIC8+PC9wZXJzaXN0cz48L3NlYXJjaD4=" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Consumer usability and acceptance of a load leg on an infant child restraint system in the United States</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2686644</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Load legs are a newly emerging safety feature on child restraint systems (CRS) in the United States (US). However, consumer usability of load legs has never been studied in the US. This study aims to characterize how US caregivers navigate load leg installations and their acceptance level of this safety feature. A convenience sample of fifty caregivers with children ages zero to two installed a rear-facing infant CRS with a load leg into a provided vehicle. Researchers observed whether the caregivers used the load leg. Participants who did not use the load leg were prompted to repeat the installation with the load leg. Researchers checked if the load leg length and angle settings were appropriate. Verbal and written surveys were used to collect caregivers’ feedback on the load leg and their demographic information. Overall, 32% of participants immediately noticed and used the load leg, 22% initially disregarded the load leg but self-corrected, and 46% finished their first installation without using it. Participants who were male, had higher household incomes, and those who used the instruction manual were more likely to use the load leg without being prompted. Once prompted, 68% of participants had the load leg set at the correct length and 74% were at the correct angle. Almost all participants (96%) correctly inferred that the intended purpose of the load leg was to provide stability, security, reduce movement, and/or increase the safety of the installation. Just over half of participants (56%) said they overall liked having the load leg. Concerns were expressed about the amount of space that the load leg takes up (30%), whether it would stay in place (18%), uncertainty about whether it would provide the intended protection in a crash (18%), and lack of clarity in the manufacturers’ instructions provided (14%). Many US caregivers are not accustomed to performing installations with load legs. Their general response to the feature was mixed, with most recognizing its intended purpose but expressing questions about its functional use.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 10:29:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2686644</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Statistical Assessment of Pretensioner and Load Limiter Effects on the Large Omnidirectional Child ATD Response in Frontal Impacts</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2692072</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Enhancing child occupant protection requires a clear understanding of how seatbelt restraint parameters influence crash injury metrics. Real-world vehicles mostly include pretensioner and load limiter technologies to mitigate injuries, but rear seat restraints often do not include these. The FMVSS No. 213 test bench closely represents current restraint systems but does not involve such active vehicle restraint features. This study explores the response of the Large Omnidirectional Child ATD to evaluate potential injury mitigation under FMVSS No. 213 frontal sled test conditions. A simulation-based full factorial design was implemented in LS-DYNA to vary pretensioner retraction, retractor load-limiting thresholds, and webbing payout, with injury measures including head acceleration, head excursion, chest compression, and abdominal pressure twin sensors (APTS). Statistical evaluation using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey-Kramer post-hoc tests quantified main and interaction effects. Pretensioners consistently reduced head excursion and acceleration, while load limiters lowered chest compression but increased excursion, illustrating a performance trade-off. Webbing payout behavior showed strong coupling to load-limiting thresholds, revealing notable parameter interdependencies. These results demonstrate that integrating pretensioners and load limiters into child restraint systems could yield meaningful safety benefits but must be optimized holistically to balance competing injury metrics. The study provides both empirical insight and a statistical framework for evaluating advanced restraint configurations in pediatric occupant simulations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:11:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2692072</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Numeracy and format influences comprehension of car seat recommendations</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2655826</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Child restraint systems (CRS) save lives in motor-vehicle crashes (MVCs) but incorrect use of CRS is common. One example is inappropriate transition between modes (e.g., rear-facing, forward-facing, and/or booster). Understanding manufacturer guidelines is therefore critical, but guidelines exceed consumer reading levels. The goal of this research is to examine the role of numeracy (i.e., math ability) in comprehension of CRS guidelines, which are highly numeric (e.g., relying on height, weight, age).  In an online experiment, 400 participants (who had previously completed an adaptive measure of numeracy) were shown one of six CRS usage diagrams based on major manufacturer’s guidelines and answered questions about the appropriateness of CRS mode depending on child’s height, weight, and age. The authors created two comprehension indices, one that allowed for two correct answers if both were appropriate and another with only the more conservative answer counting as correct. Participants also indicated perceived comprehension of the diagrams, knowledge of current CRS best practices, and prior CRS experience.  Average performance on CRS comprehension was 73% and 80% for the less and more conservative indices, respectively. Controlling for knowledge of CRS best practices and prior CRS experience, those higher in numeracy performed better in both perceived and actual comprehension. Perceived and actual comprehension also depended on diagram.  The results suggest that CRS diagrams currently used by manufacturers are somewhat well-understood by consumers, but that there is room for improvement. The results for numeracy and the differences across diagrams suggest that reducing text and visual aids could improve comprehension. Although visualizations can help under certain circumstances, they were not shown to aid comprehension here.  Taken together, the results suggest that current manufacturer guidelines can be improved. They should be simplified by streamlining text and removing unnecessary visual aids, such as number lines.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2026 11:43:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2655826</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Experimental analysis of vertical vibrations in child car seats with a swivel base</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2665944</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 2021, there were 2,338 accidents involving children up to the age of 14 on Polish roads, of which 1,922 were injured and 50 died. Children were most often involved in accidents as passengers in vehicles and pedestrians. Afternoon hours and built-up areas, where traffic is the highest, proved to be particularly dangerous. Despite the general downward trend in the number of accidents, the number of fatalities in this age group remains worrying and requires further preventive and educational measures. Considering the amount of time spent in a vehicle due to the intensity of our lives, the topic of transferring vertical vibrations through vehicle elements to car seats was raised. Safe transportation of children in a car is not only a legal obligation, but above all a key element of protecting their health and life. A car seat, properly selected for the child’s height, weight and age, significantly increases the chances of avoiding serious injuries in the event of an accident - even at low speed. Unfortunately, statistics show that in Poland many children are still improperly secured in vehicles, which can lead to tragic consequences. Proper installation and use of the seat are of great importance, which is why educating parents and guardians in this area is so important. In recent years, numerous social campaigns and information activities have been undertaken to increase awareness of the safe transportation of the youngest passengers. The objective of this study is to conduct an experiment comparing vertical vibrations in child car seats with integrated swivel bases. The article addresses the issue of vertical accelerations acting on a child seated in a car seat attached to a swivel base. The activities undertaken in this work aim to verify vertical vibrations in child car seats produced by leading manufacturers in the industry. The child car seats used in the experiment have a base integrated with the car seat. In these models, the base is not a detachable element. There are also car seats available on the market that have a universal base for several age and weight categories of seats, and these are detachable. In this study, seats for children in the 0-13 kg age category were used. The tests are carried out on an MTS test stand. Four seats of three popular brands were tested. The seats differ in weight, the material they are made of, and the shape of the swivel base.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:15:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2665944</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Child Passenger Safety: A Roadmap for State Highway Safety Offices</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2663582</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This document includes best practices and case studies related to protecting child passengers in motor vehicles. The key takeaways for State Highway Safety Offices are: utilize partnerships and create consistent child passenger safety (CPS) budgets, be strategic with funding; use data to identify high-risk areas, review outreach, evaluate impact, and track results; educate the public using consistent and clear messages; and support the training of CPS technicians. The case studies highlight safety solutions from various States such as: a media awareness campaign, a school outreach program, law enforcement training, a rural technician mentorship program, and a mobile app.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 13:12:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2663582</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Determinants of parents’ preferences for child restraint systems (CRS) in low-and-middle income urban settings</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2656216</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Road traffic injuries constitute a major threat to children’s health and well-being. Adopting child restraint systems (CRS) represents a substantial injury prevention measure to curtail the burden of child road injuries and deaths. Using a choice experiment (CE) approach, this study aims to investigate parents’ perceptions and attitudes toward child safety through the usage of CRS and examine factors influencing their decisions to purchase and install a CRS. Two focus group discussions were conducted among parents of children (12 years and below) to identify choices of attributes that influence parents’ use of a child’s car seat. The selected attributes were then adopted to build CE scenarios that were administered to parents online. Collected data were compiled, aggregated, and analyzed using the mixed logit (MXL) model for discrete choice analysis. A total of 120 parents participated in the study. 74.8 % were females with a mean age of 36.1 years. The CE experiment showed that parents in Lebanon are more likely to buy and use car seats that are convenient (ease of washing) and comfortable for their children (cushioning and adjustability of headrest), tending to prioritize these features over safety attributes (harnesses, ‘stroller-friendliness’). Parents in Lebanon are generally interested in using a child restraint system. Concerted educational awareness initiatives are recommended to impact adults’ perceptions of CRSs, overcome barriers to CRS installation to increase the use of CRS, and ultimately reduce child road injuries and fatalities.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2026 13:52:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2656216</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Car passenger safety - to the next level</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2666479</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Protecting passengers in cars requires the use of seatbelts. Although most passengers are restrained today, some are not, and some are not optimally restrained. Those individuals are thereby exposed to higher injury risks in case of a crash. In line with the future mobility services, the challenges are even more pronounced, exemplified by availability of boosters for children in shared mobility, and automated driving cars with a larger spread in seat positions and self-selected postures, such as reclined. Hence there is a need to enhance knowledge on passengers' variations in size, perceptions, sitting postures and beltfit, as input to restraint developments, in addition to assessment tools and evaluation methods beyond the current standardized crash test methods. This research project, ongoing from November 2020 to June 2024, has taken knowledge and tools needed for car passenger safety assessment to the next level, focusing on restraint interaction.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2026 08:32:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2666479</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Q-Series Child Dummy FE Model Development and Validation for Child Occupant Safety Assessment in Automotive Crashes</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2663514</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH), Government of India, has established BHARAT NCAP to provide a fair, meaningful, and objective assessment of the crash safety performance of cars. This program evaluates vehicles across three key areas, including Child Occupant Protection (COP). A critical component of the COP assessment involves dynamic testing using Q-series child dummies representing a 1½-year-old (Q1.5) and a 3-year-old child (Q3). As per the BHARAT NCAP protocol, these dummies are placed in the second-row outboard seating position within Child Restraint Systems (CRSs) and subjected to two primary dynamic impact tests: Offset Deformable Barrier (ODB) conducted at a speed of 64 km/hr. and Mobile Deformable Barrier (MDB) Side Impact tests conducted at 50 km/hr.The dynamic assessment of these child dummies is primarily focused on the head, neck, and chest regions to evaluate the effectiveness of the CRSs and overall vehicle safety system in protecting young occupants during crash events. This assessment provides crucial information to consumers regarding the safety of vehicles for child occupants and helps them towards decision-making to buy a vehicle.The finite element (FE) models of Q dummies are extensively used in the development, evaluation, optimization, and prototyping of the restraint system concepts. To ensure the accuracy of these models under dynamic impact tests, Humanetics Q dummy models are further validated through additional component, assembly, and full-body tests in addition to certification requirements.This paper presents these additional validations of Q dummies, with a focus on improving response accuracy in critical body regions. The validations were performed under frontal and side impact loading conditions to strengthen the predictability of head and upper torso kinematics exhibited during dynamic impact tests. These enhancements increase confidence in the dummies’ ability to reliably predict child occupant injuries in NCAP crash scenarios.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2026 16:36:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2663514</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of the California Child Passenger Safety Initiative</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2635340</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Motor vehicle injuries are a leading cause of injury and fatality to children. Child restraint systems can reduce injury, and their use has been a long-time focus of policy and programmatic work. During this time, there has been a marked increase in the number of children restrained in vehicles and a steady decline in vehicle-related injuries and fatalities to children. However, data reveal that children of color, compared to white children, are at greater risk of injury in motor vehicle crashes. To address needs of “the children left behind” from safety advances, the California Child Passenger Safety Initiative (CPSI) was launched in 2002 for 18 months. The CPSI was an innovative program designed to increase use and decrease misuse of child restraint systems among the most vulnerable children in California; i.e., children of color and children living in poverty. The CPSI was designed to: increase use of child safety seats among families who use public medical services at selected sites; decrease the rate of child safety seat misuse among these families; and increase knowledge of the then-new California child passenger safety seat law. This study compared survey and observation data for two samples of families with children age six and younger: a pre-intervention sample, and a post-intervention sample. Although the results of this study were mixed, dramatic increases in the use of certain child restraints and decreases in the misuse of others were observed. Implications for program replication are discussed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2026 16:28:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2635340</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The contributions of knowledge and trust involving the use of child car seats among Indigenous Peoples in Canada</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2625319</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of the current study was to examine the effects of child vehicle restraint-related knowledge and trust in information on car seat use among Indigenous Peoples in Canada. An in-person survey was administered to participants who identified as Indigenous (i.e., First Nation or Métis). Participants included those from the Canadian provinces of Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec. The sample consisted of 536 Indigenous adults, ages 18 and older, who reported having children aged 12 or younger or reported transporting other children in vehicles. The analysis focused on the prediction of consistent car seat use. Logistic regression models were used to test the main predictive effects of gender, living on reserve, levels of child vehicle restraint-related knowledge, and levels of trust in information. An interaction effect of child vehicle restraint-related knowledge by trust in information on consistent car seat use was also tested. Gender did not significantly predict consistent car seat use. However, those who reported living on reserve were 52% less likely to report consistently using car seats than those who reported not living on reserve. Additionally, those who exhibited high levels of child vehicle restraint-related knowledge were two and a half times more likely to report consistent car seat use than those with low knowledge levels. Respondents’ level of trust in information was also significantly related to consistent car seat use. Respondents who reported high levels of trust in information were nearly twice as likely to report consistent car seat use than those who reported low levels of trust. Finally, among respondents who demonstrated low knowledge, those who showed high trust in information were nearly two and half times as likely to report consistent car seat use than those who showed low trust. The current study provided evidence that having the requisite knowledge and trust in information was found to be associated with caregiver compliance in using car seats on a regular basis.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2025 15:37:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2625319</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Analysis of Child Restraint System (CRS) Compatibility with Aircraft Seats [supporting dataset]</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2628262</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) encourages the use of aircraft-approved child restraint systems (CRS, or child safety seats) on aircraft. CRS are primarily designed for use in automotive vehicles. The installation of a CRS on an aircraft seat can be challenging due to physical space restrictions. If too many barriers exist for caregivers attempting to fly with a CRS, they might choose a less safe option such as holding their infant or buckling a small child into a lap belt only. The broad objective of this work is to quantify compatibility concerns between CRS and aircraft seats and belts to ultimately facilitate higher rates of CRS use on aircraft. The physical dimensions of aircraft seats (n=8) were obtained through collaboration with the seat manufacturers. Seats included economy and premium in regional jet, narrow body, and wide body aircraft. The corresponding dimensions of various CRS (n=64) were compiled from previous studies. Compatibility between CRS and aircraft seats was predicted in terms of seat width, seat cushion angles, seat cushion length, head restraint height, depth, and belt buckle location. Aircraft seat dimensions were also compared to automotive vehicle seat dimensions (n=111) collected during previous studies so that broad comparisons could be made across the seating environments. Aircraft seat dimensions were also compared to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 213 inversion bench and the aircraft/CRS compatibility guidance within SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) 4466. The width of several aircraft seats could not accommodate the width of many CRS, especially larger types of CRS in regional jet or narrow body aircraft. Aircraft seat cushion angles were more horizontal than those in vehicles. The seat back angle with respect to seat cushion angle matched forward-facing (FF) CRS reasonably well, suggesting good fit in terms of angle. Seat cushion length in aircraft are shorter than the length needed to accommodate many rear-facing (RF) CRS. The depth of aircraft seats (fore/aft space between rows) is similar to that of vehicles with the front row slider track in the fully rearward position. This may cause difficulty installing large CRS in RF mode. Aircraft seat belt buckle hardware often sits within the belt path of many CRS. The FMVSS 213 inversion bench has a steeper seat pan angle and more acute angle between seat cushions compared to the aircraft seat dimensions collected in this study. The aircraft seat dimensions matched the guidance in SAE ARP4466 well, and the recommended dimensions would accommodate some of the smaller CRS but not larger CRS.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 11:20:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2628262</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Analysis of Child Restraint System (CRS) Compatibility with Aircraft Seats</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2628261</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Child restraint systems (CRS or child safety seats) are primarily designed for use in automotive vehicles. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) encourages the use of CRS approved for use on aircraft. The securement of a CRS to an aircraft seat can be challenging due to physical space restrictions. If caregivers face too many barriers when attempting to fly with a CRS, they might choose a less safe option, such as holding their infant or securing the infant or child in an aircraft seat using only the FAA-approved seat belt (usually a lap belt only). The broad objective of this work is to quantify compatibility concerns between CRS and aircraft seats and seat belts to ultimately facilitate higher rates of CRS use on aircraft. The physical dimensions of aircraft seats (n=8) were obtained through collaboration with seat manufacturers. Seats included economy and premium class in regional jet, narrow-body, and wide-body aircraft. The dimensions of various CRS (n=64) were compiled from previous studies, including infant, convertible, combination, and all-in-one CRS types. Compatibility between CRS and aircraft seats was predicted in terms of seat width, seat cushion angles, seat cushion length, adjustable headrest height from seat cushion, depth (fore/aft space between rows), and seat belt buckle location. Aircraft seat dimensions were also compared to automotive vehicle seat dimensions (n=111) collected during previous studies, so that broad comparisons could be made across the seating environments. Aircraft seat dimensions were also compared to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 213 inversion bench and the aircraft/CRS compatibility guidance within SAE International Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) 4466. The width of several aircraft seats could not accommodate the width of most CRS, especially larger types of CRS (convertible, combination, and all-in-one) in regional jet and narrow-body aircraft. Aircraft seat cushion angles were more horizontal than those in vehicles. The seat back angle with respect to seat cushion angle matched forward-facing (FF) CRS reasonably well, suggesting a good fit in terms of angle. Seat cushion length in aircraft is shorter than the length needed to accommodate many rear-facing (RF) CRS. The depth of aircraft seats (fore/aft space between rows) is similar to that of vehicles with the front row slider track in the fully rearward position. This may cause difficulty securing large CRS in RF mode. Aircraft seat belt buckle hardware often sits within the belt path of many CRS. The FMVSS 213 inversion bench has a steeper seat pan angle and a more acute angle between seat cushions compared to the aircraft seat dimensions collected in this study. The aircraft seat dimensions matched the guidance in SAE ARP4466 well, and the recommended dimensions would accommodate some of the smaller CRS, but not the larger CRS. The results of this study provide benchmark data for manufacturers and elucidate potential difficulties for manufacturers, regulators, safety advocates, and caregivers to consider.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 11:20:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2628261</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Retention of learning from onsite versus remote child restraint check-up visits: A randomized noninferiority clinical trial</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2622244</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Child restraints (car seats) reduce pediatric injury and death. Assistance and education from certified car seat technicians, either onsite or remotely, improves immediate restraint installation/use, but evaluation of whether caregivers learn to independently install restraints following technician interactions is lacking. This study evaluated whether caregivers learn to install/use child restraints following interaction with certified technicians. From 2020 to 2024, 931 individuals in 7 US cities interacted with certified technicians to install restraints either onsite or remotely via interactive virtual presence. Four months later, restraint installation/use was assessed twice: (a) upon arrival, assessing restraints as traveling on roadways, and (b) after uninstallation and unassisted re-installation by caregivers, assessing caregiver capacity to install restraints 4 months post-training. Upon arrival, participants assigned four months earlier to onsite and in-person interactions had mean = 90.56 % (SD = 10.74) installation/use components correct; participants randomized to remote interactions had 92.19 % (SD = 9.02) correct, a significant difference (−1.591, SE = 0.632, p < 0.001). After uninstallation and unassisted reinstallation, onsite participants had mean = 92.64 % (SD = 10.14) correct and remote 94.11 % (SD = 7.88), also significant (−1.809, SE = 0.508, p < 0.001). Child restraint installation/use was good but not perfect both four months following engagement with technicians and after reinstallation. Participants assigned to remote technician interactions achieved noninferior and, in fact, superior scores, perhaps reflecting the value of physically completing installation tasks themselves rather than relying on technicians to help. Results confirm the value of interaction with certified technicians not just to assure proper immediate installation/use of child restraints but also to train caregivers on proper installation/use.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2025 10:19:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2622244</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Characterizing suboptimal child passenger safety practices in crashes with fatalities: Child, driver, vehicle, neighborhood, and policy factors</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617076</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Suboptimal child passenger safety practices in the United States persist despite national guidelines, state laws, and safety benefits of child passenger restraint systems (CRS). Child passenger safety practices have not been characterized in a national crash dataset since 2011 updates to American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines. We sought to identify child, driver, vehicle, neighborhood, and policy-level factors associated with suboptimal child passenger safety practices in motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) with a fatality. We additionally present identified hotspots of suboptimal practices for intervention targeting. We conducted a cross-sectional study of children <13 years old in passenger cars and light trucks with known restraint status and seating location from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) database, 2011–2021.OutcomeSuboptimal practices defined as: 1) not using an age-appropriate CRS, 2) police reported misuse, or 3) front seat location. Child age, prior driver traffic violations, vehicle occupancy, driver’s ZIP Code-level Child Opportunity Index 3.0 (COI), state-level CRS and seatbelt fines, and state CRS law score by year. Geospatial hotspot analysis was conducted to identify counties with greater concentrations of suboptimal practices. Of 52,318 passengers <13 years old, 38,372 (73.3%) had a known restraint [29.4% CRS, 50.7% seatbelt, 19.9% unrestrained] and seating position [15.2% in front seat]. Suboptimal practices were identified in 26,731 (69.7%) children with 4-7 and 8-12 year olds observed to have the highest proportion. The strongest predictors of suboptimal practices were child age 4-7 years (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.09-1.12) vs. <4 years and vehicle over capacity (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.06-1.11). There was a decrease in suboptimal child passenger safety practices with increasing vehicle model year, COI level, fines, and law scores. Seventy-five counties each were hotspots for overall suboptimal practices and for premature transitions, 45 were hotspots for riding unrestrained, and 64 were hotspots for traveling in the front seat. Our findings can inform targets for populations with higher need for efforts to promote child passenger safety including drivers of children 4-7 years old, traveling with more passengers than seating positions, or from low COI areas. Associations with fines and CRS law scores signal the positive impact of legislation to discourage suboptimal practices.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:09:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617076</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Repositioning forward-leaning booster-seated child occupants in frontal-oblique low-acceleration impacts</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617074</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recently, pre-pretensioner equipped seatbelts (PPT) were found to be effective in repositioning forward-leaning adults. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the PPT on booster-seated forward-leaning children during sled-simulated frontal oblique low-acceleration impacts. Eight child volunteers (mean: 6.6 ± 0.5 years, four males, four females; weight 24.2 ± 2.1 kg; seated height 64.4 ± 3.9 cm) were seated on a low-acceleration impact sled in a high-back belt-positioning booster seat (BPB) on a rear vehicle bench seat restrained with a three-point seatbelt with a PPT. Volunteers were exposed to a far-side impact 30° from frontal (peak acceleration 1 g, duration 265 ms). Four randomized testing conditions were examined and repeated twice: seatbelt conditions with PPT (85 N at 250 ms prior sled onset) and without PPT; and a standard and a forward-leaning posture. A 3D motion capture system captured participants’ kinematics. Repeated measure three-way ANOVAs tested the effect of seatbelt condition, posture, and repetition on head and trunk peak forward displacement. All displacements were measured relative to the initial position. The PPT reduced peak forward head displacements in both standard (PPT 103 ± 21 mm vs no-PPT 165 ± 19 mm) and forward-leaning (PPT 42 ± 37 mm vs no-PPT 138 ± 25 mm) postures (p < .001). In the forward-leaning posture with the PPT, the maximum trunk displacement was the initial position: the peak trunk displacement during the sled pulse was less forward than the initial trunk position. Overall, the peak forward trunk displacement was greater in the standard posture (50 ± 37 mm) than in the forward-leaning posture (29 ± 45 mm) (p < .001) and was greater without the PPT (79 ± 13 mm) than with the PPT (1 ± 18 mm). Reduced values with the PPT were also found in the lateral head and trunk displacements (p < .005) regardless of initial posture. The PPT reduced head and trunk displacements in forward-leaning postures and prevented the trunk from moving further forward from the initial forward-leaning position. A PPT, with a relatively low force of 85 N, has the potential to reduce out-of-position postures in booster-seated children in nonstandard seating positions.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:09:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617074</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>