Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

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

Bespoke Study also keen for cyclists to log collisions and near misses on Collideoso.pe website

More than 50 cyclists injured on London’s roads in the last month have become the first to take part in an 18-month research project which seeks to make cycling in the capital safer. As part of the ongoing Bespoke Study, injured cyclists attending The Royal London Hospital will be asked a series of questions about their accidents.

Between 2004 and 2014 The Royal London Hospital saw a near 400 per cent increase in the number of cyclists admitted with fatal or serious injuries. Questions asked of patients will include whether they were listening to music, whether they had lights and whether they were wearing a helmet or reflective clothing. Six weeks after discharge, they will again be questioned to find out how the incident has affected their daily life and attitude to cycling.

The Bespoke team are also asking people to log cycling collisions, incidents and near misses through the Collideosco.pe app and website. Although the Bespoke project is London focused, the site can be used to record incidents nationwide.

Professional rider Alex Dowsett, who receives treatment for haemophilia at the Royal London hospital, has previously lent his support for Collideosco.pe, saying: “I got involved because I have had some near misses on the road myself. It’s a good tool to advise doctors of the most likely injuries cyclists are likely to get.”

Mr Manoj Ramachandran, Consultant orthopaedic surgeon at Barts Health NHS Trust and Bespoke Project Lead, said:

“We are looking at where and how cycling accidents happen in London and then the impact the injuries and trauma sustained have on everyday life.

“We want to explore if the collision changed work and daily living activities, quality of life and whether the accident has affected people’s cycling habits.

“The overall aim of the project is to contribute data that will help make cycling in London safer and help promote cycling with all its associated health, environmental and transport benefits.

“We also hope that this will become a model used in other cities across the country which could have a real impact on accident prevention and the management of cycling injuries.”

The patient study will run for 18 months. At that point, results will be published and sent to Transport for London, London Cycling Campaign and local borough councils.

The Bespoke project has been backed by Cycling UK president and Channel 4 News presenter, Jon Snow, who said: “The innovative Bespoke data project led by researchers in London’s biggest emergency department is key to unlocking data which is currently lacking from the debate about cycle safety in London. I urge all London cyclists to get involved. The only way we will win significant provision for cycling is through evidence. So let's collect it together by using Collideoscope.”

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

11 comments

Avatar
Initialised | 7 years ago
0 likes

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.

Avatar
gmac101 | 7 years ago
0 likes

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.

Avatar
Arceye | 7 years ago
2 likes

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.

Avatar
gmac101 | 7 years ago
3 likes

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.

Avatar
oldstrath replied to gmac101 | 7 years ago
1 like

gmac101 wrote:

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.

I'd love to know how this will 'prove' anything at all. Without knowing what proportion of non victims wear hivis, for example, what would you do with the information that 30% of victims were wearing it?

And just saying "it's hard for them to do the thing properly (by interviewing the drivers)" isn't actually a good reason to support doing it badly.

Avatar
ChrisB200SX | 7 years ago
3 likes

“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"?

Avatar
Edgeley | 7 years ago
3 likes

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?

Avatar
tritecommentbot | 7 years ago
5 likes

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.

Avatar
ibike | 7 years ago
2 likes

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.

 

 

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 7 years ago
7 likes

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).

Avatar
DaveE128 | 7 years ago
4 likes

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?

Latest Comments