Jump to comment:
- Unmerited conclusionsShow More
I was disconcerted (and by that I mean, rather angry) by the conclusion of the article "Pregnancy and the risk of a traffic crash", in the July 8 issue. The first assertion claims that the "study suggests that serious motor vehicle crashes [MVC's] are COMMON [emphasis mine] during the second trimester".It may have been supposed to say, compared with non-pregnancy, or with other trimesters, but as stated this is certainly...
Competing Interests: None declared. - Pregnancy and the risk of a traffic crash: considering surveillance biasShow More
Redelmeier and colleagues bring to attention an important issue regarding an increased risk of serious motor vehicle accidents in pregnancy. The authors define their outcome as a crash that resulted in a visit to an emergency department, identified using ICD codes related to vehicle crashes. This article was read with keen interest, considering its implications for safety in pregnancy. However, unmasking bias (also refer...
Competing Interests: None declared. - Statistics are Fun but Potentially MisleadingShow More
I read with great interest Redelmeier,May,Thiruchelvam, and Barrett's (2014) article on pregnancy and risk of a potential motor vehicle accident. These authors suggest that risk for a motor vehicle accident increases at the beginning of the second trimester of pregnancy and then subsides to baseline by the third trimester. The assumption underneath this risk is that potential cognitive deficits and/or fatigue associated...
Competing Interests: None declared.