Tackling the Road Safety Crisis: Saving Lives Through Research and Action (2024)
Chapter: 5 Translational Science: Illustration of Research to Practice Applications
5
Translational Science: Illustration of Research to Practice Applications
INTRODUCTION
Translating research into practice is the managed progression of science and research findings from the scientist’s desk to meaningful practice for the benefit of individuals and society. This chapter describes how translational science—a field of study dedicated to generating innovations in research translation—is applied to biomedicine, public health and other fields to advance the processes associated with translating research findings into evidence-based practice.1 Research translation is a nonlinear process and involves collaborations among researchers, practitioners, educators, policymakers, industry professionals, and end users. Successful translation requires systems thinking to ensure a strong understanding of internal and external forces that can affect the outcomes of interventions. It also requires a willingness to be transparent and to make methods and data available for broader review and feedback.2
This chapter then uses its introduction of translational science and research translation in biomedicine to establish their relevance and
___________________
1 National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS). “Translational Science Spectrum.” Last updated April 22, 2024. https://ncats.nih.gov/about/about-translational-science/spectrum; Austin, C.P. 2018. “Translating Translation.” Nature Review Drug Discovery 17:455–456.
2 Austin, C.P. 2018. “Translating Translation.” Nature Review Drug Discovery 17:455–456; Collins, F.S. 2011. “Reengineering Translational Science: The Time Is Right. Science Translational Medicine 3(90):90cm17. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3002747; Faupel-Badger, J.M., A. Vogel, C.P. Austin, and J.L. Rutter. “Advancing Translational Science Education.” Preprint August 31, 2022. Clinical Translation Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.13390.
adaptability to road safety research. It discusses strategies for research translation and compares research translation in biomedicine with technology transfer as it is typically practiced for U.S. transportation research. It illustrates research translation in road safety through an examination of the evolution of rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) to improve pedestrian safety.
The chapter continues with an examination of research translation in early childhood education and the motor vehicle industry. Research on the effectiveness of early childhood education and Head Start illustrates research translation in the policy context. The examination of research translation in the motor vehicle industry describes the steps that industry takes to advance the safety of its vehicles in the context of federal vehicle safety standards.
RESEARCH TRANSLATION IN BIOMEDICINE
The field of translational science has its home in biomedical science. In 2011, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) created the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) to “catalyze the generation of innovative methods and technologies” to enhance the development, testing, and implementation of diagnostics and therapeutics across human diseases and conditions. NCATS undertook a deliberate process to define “translation,” “translational research,” and “translational science.”3 It emphasized that while it studies the first (translation) as a process, and performs the second (translational research), what distinguishes NCATS from any other organization in the United States or internationally is its focus on the third—translational science—as a discipline. Box 5-1 covers key terms as they are defined in translation science and gives example of how these terms apply to road safety.
The biomedicine field has established five stages (T0 to T4) of research translation: basic biomedical research, preclinical research, clinical research, clinical implementation, and public health. Table 5-1 outlines what occurs during these five stages in biomedicine, along with examples of what their counterparts would be for road safety research. Basic research is laboratory studies that would typically take place in government or university research centers. For road safety, preclinical research would include proof-of-concept studies for candidate crash countermeasures. The clinical research stage would then test countermeasures in the field to refine them or to establish best practices. Clinical implementation is the widespread adoption of the
___________________
3 Austin, C.P. 2018. “Translating Translation.” Nature Review Drug Discovery 17:455–456.
BOX 5-1
Defining Terms for Research Translation in Biomedical Science and Road Safety Research
Translation, as used in biomedical science, is the process of turning observations in the laboratory, clinic, and community into interventions that improve the health of individuals and the public. Translation in road safety means turning knowledge of crash precursors from field observation, laboratory experiments, theories, and models simulation into countermeasures that reduce risks and improve outcomes for vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users in motor vehicle crashes.
Dissemination is the process of distributing information and intervention materials to a specific audience. The road safety audience includes safety regulatory agencies; policymakers; engineers, planners, and law enforcement officials from state, regional, and local transportation agencies and jurisdictions; vehicle designers; and educators who prepare these professionals.
Adaptation is the intentional modification(s) of an evidence-informed intervention to make it better fit to a new context. Modification can include planned adaptations (changes made before introducing a new intervention) and responsive adaptations (changes made intentionally, but in response to emerging contextual issues occurring during implementation). Adaptation of interventions is likely to be ongoing as context changes over time.
Implementation is the process that uses strategies and tools to integrate and deploy evidence-based interventions into real-world settings. Effective implementation in road safety requires key stakeholders to support the adoption, evaluation of effectiveness, and sustainability of the interventions themselves.
Evidence-Based Practice is the practice guided by the evidence generated from research findings. In road safety, this includes ensuring that the research evidence supports the deployment of countermeasures. The evidence must demonstrate that a reduction in crash frequencies, fatalities, or serious injuries are likely to occur as a result of the implementation of crash countermeasures, policies, guidance, and standards.
SOURCE: Austin, C.P. 2018. “Translating Translation.” Nature Review Drug Discovery 17:455–456.
TABLE 5-1 Research Translation Stages in Biomedicine and Road Safety
| Stage | Biomedical Research Translation | Road Safety Research Translation |
|---|---|---|
| T0 | Basic biomedical research (Laboratory studies to define mechanisms). | Laboratory studies (e.g., National Highway Traffic Safety Administration crash barrier tests, Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] studies at Turner Fairbank Highway Research Center); analysis or modeling of crash or risk patterns using established databases (e.g., crash, roadway, and vehicle data); basic science research concerning safety systems (e.g., new technologies for alcohol impairment testing). |
| T1 | Preclinical research (Proof-of-concept studies for new methods) Connecting basic science information with human medicine. | Proof of concept studies for countermeasure development; designing analytical, mathematical, physical models/tools for practitioner applications such as the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) 2 Naturalistic Driving Data1; early interactions with practitioners to adapt and confirm feasibility of research. |
| T2 | Clinical research (Demonstration of efficacy and effectiveness) Controlled field studies to assess effectiveness. | Experimental studies to evaluate efficacy and effectiveness of countermeasures before publishing, development of best practices for adaptation and application. |
| T3 | Clinical implementation (Translation to practice) Implementation studies to deliver effective programs including adopting interventions that have been demonstrated to be useful in a research environment into routine clinical care for the general population. | Widespread field implementation of recommended countermeasures; monitoring and evaluating unexpected side effects, including evaluation of FHWA Low-Cost Safety Improvements Pooled Fund Study. |
| T4 | Public health (Translation to population) Widespread implementation for societal benefit. | Ex post evaluation—measuring long term benefits and effects on safety, and successful adaptations; providing feedback to researchers. |
1 Campbell, K.L. 2012. “The SHRP 2 Naturalistic Driving Study.” TR News, September–October, pp. 30–35. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews282SHRP2nds.pdf. SOURCE: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. “Translational Science Spectrum.” Last updated April 22, 2024. https://ncats.nih.gov/about/about-translational-science/spectrum.
countermeasures into regular transportation practice. The public health stage applies to the population level and examines long-term outcomes.4
Strategies to Improve Research Translation
Studies from translational science have found common elements that support successful research translation in biomedical research. The elements, listed below, may be useful in translating research into practice in the field of transportation safety.
- Develop a shared research agenda, with assistance from stakeholders.5
- Engage stakeholders continually throughout the research process to verify feasibility and responsiveness.6
- Provide specialized training to practitioners for successful implementation.7
- Adapt research ideas to fit specific settings, without compromising core elements.8
- Evaluate the implementation process to make the case to leaders and policymakers.
These research practices are not commonly followed in translating research into practice for safety technology development.
What has been learned about research translation in biomedical research through NCATS and other activities has direct applicability to other fields. The salience to road safety research is particularly strong because of the high crash fatality rate and the complex and apparently disconnected relationship between road safety research and practice in the United States. Another important consideration is the thorough evaluation of treatment effectiveness for patients that is built into the translation process. As
___________________
4 National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS). “Translational Science Spectrum.” Last updated April 22, 2024. https://ncats.nih.gov/about/about-translational-science/spectrum.
5 Kilbourne, A.M., R.E. Glasgow, and D.A. Chambers. 2020. “What Can Implementation Science Do for You? Key Success Stories from the Field.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 35(Suppl 2):783–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06174-6.
6 Canfield, K.N., K. Mulvaney, and C.D. Chatelain. 2022. “Using Researcher and Stakeholder Perspectives to Develop Promising Practices to Improve Stakeholder Engagement in the Solutions-Driven Research Process.” Socioecological Practice Research 4(3):189–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-022-00119-5.
7 Kilbourne, A.M., R.E. Glasgow, and D.A. Chambers. 2020. “What Can Implementation Science Do for You? Key Success Stories from the Field.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 35(Suppl 2):783–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06174-6.
8 Ibid.
described in previous sections of the report, road safety countermeasures are routinely implemented but not always evaluated for effectiveness. This is comparable to treating a patient and then not following up to determine if the patient’s condition has improved (through to stage T4 in Table 5-1).
An important characteristic of the translation process in medicine is that researchers and practitioners may be, in some cases, the same people.9 Many medical researchers maintain clinical practices, which keeps them connected to the patient needs they are working to fulfill. To build this connection into road safety research, where the practitioners are the customers, formal and timely communication between practitioners and the researchers is necessary to ensure the relevance and feasibility of the research. This communication should happen on a regular basis, in both the early stages of the research cycle and before products are finalized.
Technology Transfer Compared to Research Translation
Within the transportation safety field, although efforts are underway, research translation is not yet as formalized as in the biomedical field. Historically, moving research into practice in transportation has been facilitated through organized technology transfer programs.
FHWA (including its Local and Tribal Technical Assistance Programs), other federal agencies, state Departments of Transportation, and public universities strongly support technology transfer programs in almost every state. These programs are important channels that bring practitioners information about new and promising innovations in highway design, materials, operations, and management, including safety. While not all five stages of biomedical research translation are involved, these programs facilitate a two-way bridge between researchers and practitioners that increases the likelihood that the right, deployable research is produced and utilized. However, making research translation an integral part of transportation safety and applying it to every innovation still remains a significant challenge.
Illustrating the Translational Research Process: Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons
In contrast to medicine, road safety research has many different paths that transition from research to implementation (see Chapter 3). These multiple pathways with different actors, interests, and motivations represent a
___________________
9 Austin, C.P. 2021. “Opportunities and Challenges in Translational Science.” Clinical Translation Science 14(5):1629–1647. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.13055.
challenge to the successful translation of road safety research projects and potential countermeasures into real-world practices.
The rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB) is a relatively new countermeasure, the implementation of which has closely followed the biomedical research translation model. Therefore, it is a useful example of the research translation approach applied to road safety.10 Table 5-2 describes the process that brought the RRFB into practice, mapped onto the biomedical research translation stages in Table 5-2.11
TABLE 5-2 Road Safety Research Translation Steps in a Countermeasure Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Example with Evidence
| Translation Step | RRFB Evolution and Implementation |
|---|---|
| T0 | Basic research lab work, explore behavior. An adoption of a local trails and bicycle master plan led to initiatives to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. RRFB provided pedestrian-actuated conspicuity enhancements for pedestrian and school crossing warning signs. This was an early innovation at the local level prior to any previous use of this design. |
| T1 | Preclinical research, model testing, refine treatments. Early efforts of RRFB drew it back into basic testing and evaluation. |
| T2 | Clinical research, field testing. Produced promising results in limited evaluation at 18 initial field sites; larger scale and more formal field evaluation completed resulting in development of deployment guidance. Interim MUTCD approval obtained to move RRFB into field more quickly. |
| T3 | Clinical implementation, large scale deployment. Field implementation. Interruption due to proprietary ownership claim, later resolved. |
| T4 | Public health, translate to population. Continued long-term deployment and testing across settings through inclusion in MUTCD, assessing effects of intervention. |
SOURCES: Developed with information from Fitzpatrick, K., M.A. Brewer, R. Avelar Moran, and T. Lindheimer. 2016. “Will You Stop for Me? Roadway Design and Traffic Control Device Influences on Drivers Yielding to Pedestrians in a Crosswalk with a Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon.” Report No. TTI-CTS-0010. Texas A&M Transportation Institute; and discussion during committee meetings.
___________________
10 RRFBs consist of two rectangular-shaped yellow indications, each with a LED-array-based light source. RRFBs flash with an alternating high frequency when activated to enhance conspicuity of pedestrians at the crossing to drivers.
11 Fitzpatrick, K., M.A. Brewer, R. Avelar Moran, and T. Lindheimer. 2016. “Will You Stop for Me? Roadway Design and Traffic Control Device Influences on Drivers Yielding to Pedestrians in a Crosswalk with a Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon.” Report No. TTI-CTS-0010. Texas A&M Transportation Institute; and discussion during committee meetings.
RESEARCH TRANSLATION IN FEDERAL POLICY MAKING: EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
Federal program investment decisions are commonly informed by research that assesses policy needs and expected outcomes and evaluates program effectiveness. In contrast with research translation in medicine or road safety, the end users of the research, the customers, are normally policymakers, including members of Congress and their staff. The researchers and agencies that conduct policy research are more distant from the end users than in these other fields—they are rarely in the same institutions,12 and the process of moving information between producer and user is less formalized. Still, the value of the information coming from policy research can have a high impact on policy and program formation.
Policy Research for Head Start
One area where federal policy has been informed by research from multiple sources is early childhood education, the period of learning that takes place from birth to 8 years old. Considerable program development and research has focused on educating children under the age of kindergarten–prekindergarten (pre-K) education. Formal, early childhood education can be traced back to the turn of the 20th century in Europe, notably the establishment of Montessori schools in Italy. Children in lower income households continue to be the primary focus of federal involvement in early childhood education policy, and there have been “decades of research that high-quality preschool is linked to positive social and academic outcomes.”13
The largest pre-K educational program in the United States is Head Start, first launched in 1965 and the nation’s first federally funded pre-K program intended to prepare children (especially disadvantaged children) to succeed in K–12 schooling and, ultimately, as productive citizens.14 Head Start has long been the focus of Congressional assessment and decision-making. The program, serving more than 1 million children at a cost of $10 billion in 2019, has been controversial, in part because of the costs and differing perspectives on the role of the federal government in social
___________________
12 Exceptions are research performed by congressional agencies: the Library of Congress, the Congressional Research Service, and the Government Accountability Office; these agencies rarely engage in experimental field research for program evaluation.
13 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. A New Vision for High-Quality Preschool Curriculum. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/27429.
14 “Head Start History,” June 30, 2023. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ohs/about/history-head-start.
programs, and because of concerns about the effectiveness of the program coupled with methodological challenges in its evaluation.15
Research results have played an important role in the deliberations, serving as a source of objective guidance in program design and investment decisions. In 1961, psychologist Joseph Hunt argued that children’s intelligence could be significantly improved by altering their earliest experiences.16,17,18,19 This fundamental research supported, and continues to support, program design and implementation.
Subsequent applied research has focused on program evaluation and considers both short- and long-term outcomes. This research typically relies on natural experiments that track student outcomes. This work is similar to road safety research aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of crash countermeasures: before–after or case-control designs comparing places (or students) that did and did not experience the intervention. Research on the effectiveness of Head Start has been funded by the federal government, private research foundations, and advocacy groups, which introduces the possibility of bias, raising the need to sort out advocacy from factual outcomes. Such research can be difficult to do well, as it is affected by sampling biases, observational effects, and the challenge of tracking children (and, similarly, crash countermeasures) over long time periods. Like many road safety crash countermeasures, Head Start programs are implemented locally. The researcher has only limited or no control of program design. In addition, careful measurement of the intervention effect is important, as it can be different in different applications.
The research process in the case of Head Start involved cycling between multiple groups conducting and publishing (or presenting) research that produced competing and sometimes conflicting findings. Vetting occurred through processes such as peer review, research criticism in the literature and at conferences, and in presentations to policymakers.20
___________________
15 Karch, A. 2013. Early Start: Preschool Politics in the United States. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1qv5ng7.
16 Hunt, J.M. 1961. Intelligence and Experience. New York: Ronald Press.
17 Bushouse, B. 2009. Universal Preschool. SUNY Press.
18 Tierney, A.L., and C.A. Nelson III. 2009. “Brain Development and the Role of Experience in the Early Years.” Zero to Three 30(2):9–13.
19 Bloom, B.S. 1964. Stability and Change in Human Characteristics. New York: Wiley.
20 For example: “Biennial Report to Congress on the Status of Children in the Head Start Program—FY 2019.” Accessed February 11, 2024. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ohs/ohs-2019-biennial-report-to-congress.pdf.
The earliest evaluation of Head Start, funded by the federal government and conducted by Ohio University and the Westinghouse Learning Corp., was quite negative.21 However, it was criticized for a number of methodological flaws.22 Numerous follow-on evaluations, using more sophisticated methods found positive and lasting outcomes.23,24,25,26
The subsequent extensive set of evaluations of Head Start delivered increasingly more detailed and varied assessments. These evaluations tracked program variations and facilitated ongoing discussion in the social science literature that refined a consensus understanding of program impacts. For example, a 2020 study found that cohorts that attended Head Start had higher incomes and years of education as adults than similar children who did not attend.27 Another study found that the children exposed to programs with more generous funding had substantially improved test scores relative to children enrolled in less-well-funded programs.28 A 2021 study found that students enrolled in Head Start ended up having substantially higher high school completion rates, college enrollment, and college completion rates than comparable children who were not enrolled in Head Start, concluding that, “these estimates imply sizable, long-term returns to investments in means-tested, public preschool programs.”29 This
___________________
21 Westinghouse Learning Corporation. 1969. “The Impacts of Head Start: An Evaluation of the Effects of Head Start on Children’s Cognitive and Affective Development.” U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity. Accessed February 11, 2024. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED036321.
22 Grimmett, S., and A.M. Garrett. 1989. “A Review of Evaluations of Project Head Start.” Journal of Negro Education 58(1):30–38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2295548.
23 Lazar, I., et al. 1977. “The Persistence of Preschool Effects a Long-Term Follow-Up of Fourteen Infant and Preschool Experiments, Summary.” Administration for Children, Youth and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
24 CSR, Inc. 1985. “The Impact of Head Start on Children, Families, and Communities.” Final Report of the Head Start Evaluation, Synthesis, and Utilization Project. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Publication No. OHDS 85-31193.
25 Schweinhart, L.J. 2013. “Long-Term Follow-Up of a Preschool Experiment.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 9:389–409. Accessed February 10, 2024. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11292-013-9190-3.pdf.
26 Bauer, L. 2019. “Does Head Start Work? The Debate Over the Head Start Impact Study, Explained.” The Brookings Institute. Accessed February 10, 2024. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/does-head-start-work-the-debate-over-the-head-start-impact-study-explained.
27 De Haan, M., and E. Leuven. 2019. “Head Start and the Distribution of Long-Term Education and Labor Market Outcomes.” Journal of Labor Economics 38(3):727–765. https://doi.org/10.1086/706090.
28 Kose, E. 2023. “Public Investments in Early Childhood Education and Academic Performance: Evidence from Head Start in Texas.” Journal of Human Resources 58(6):2042–2069. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.0419-10147R2.
29 Bailey, M.J., S. Sun, and B. Timpe. 2021. “Prep School for Poor Kids: The Long-Run Impacts of Head Start on Human Capital and Economic Self-Sufficiency.” American Economic Review 111(12):3963–4001. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20181801.
growing knowledge base influenced the policy process, helping to sustain this program for nearly six decades.30
Policy Research and Road Safety Research
The totality of the dialog concerning Head Start that took place through multiple publications represents a less formal approach to research validation and translation into policy than research translation in the biomedical field. What discipline there is comes from the relatively public interaction of researchers and their customers. Policy research itself can be diverse in both sources and issues because of the range of topics addressed. The political nature of policy formation naturally leads to the introduction of biases and the influence of viewpoints in both methodology and interpretation. This puts pressure on the researcher to deliver results that are methodologically strong and readily interpreted.
Road safety research shares this lack of formal structure compared with biomedical research translation. The winding road of public acceptance of Head Start from 1961 through the 2020s is comparable to persistent difficulties faced by road safety researchers in the last 20 years as evidence-based research has been slowly adopted in practice. Road safety has intersecting interests at the local, state, and national levels which may require different messaging and modes of communication to advance research into practice. The formal structure of road safety guidelines and manuals is ill-suited to communicating the subtleties of safety actions and rationale.
Public health researchers and practitioners play a key role in road safety as road traffic injury and death is a public health problem and foundational competencies and functions of public health involve evaluation and translational science. As a core Safe System player, state and federal public health agencies should be included in translation and evaluation processes.
The motor vehicle industry makes extensive use of evidence-based research in vehicle design. This process is more closely integrated than biomedicine and road safety research, in that a cross-functional team within a single company conducts basic research, develops designs, oversees manufacturing, and coordinates finance and marketing. The closely linked translation process in this industry, described in the sidebar below, makes communication and collaboration more efficient throughout the research-to-practice cycle.
___________________
30 Methods for systematically monitoring the performance of federally funded Head Start are regularly promulgated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; for example, see Head Start, Early Childhood Learning Knowledge Center, “Federal Monitoring.” Accessed February 10, 2024. https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/monitoreo-federal/articulo/fiscal-year-fy-2024-head-start-monitoring-protocols.
SIDEBAR
Research Translation in the Motor Vehicle Industry: Designing Safe Vehicles Through Evidence-Based Research
The motor vehicle industry offers a different application of translating research into practice. In contrast to the other examples in this report, research and its implementation in the motor vehicle industry are closely coupled in a single company or at least a single industry. This makes communication and collaboration simpler and more efficient throughout the research-to-practice cycle.
Vehicle design plays a major role in affecting both crash occurrence and crash outcomes.a The industry is also a contributor to the Safe System Approach (SSA), as outlined in the National Roadway Safety Strategy (NRSS).b Vehicle designs can play a pivotal role in the SSA “safer vehicles” pillar with design features like occupant protection, vulnerable road users’ protection, and crash avoidance technologies. Vehicle manufacturers can contribute to “safer people” through technologies that limit driver behaviors such as speeding, alcohol, and distraction and that encourage seat belt use; to “safer roads” through vehicle technologies that will enable vehicle-to-infrastructure communications; and to the “post-crash care” pillar through technologies for 911 notifications capable of providing trauma centers with advance notice of vehicle speed, airbag deployments, vehicle occupancy, seating locations, and potential injuries.
Motor vehicle industry safety research is driven by at least three factors:
- Mandatory crash performance standards issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) as Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).c
- Consumer testing that produces crashworthiness, occupant protection, and crash avoidance ratings.d Feedback from this testing can bring issues back to the research process.
- Data and reports of crash experience and outcomes, which are indicators of crash risks and problems that emerge independent of established standards.e
Since 1966, manufacturers have designed, built, and marketed only vehicles that are compliant with FMVSS, which define required vehicle performance in risk and
__________________
a “What Can Vehicle Design Contribute? European Commission.” Accessed May 7, 2024. https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/eu-road-safety-policy/priorities/safe-vehicles/archive/what-can-vehicle-design-contribute_en.
b U.S. Department of Transportation, National Roadway Safety Strategy. https://www.transportation.gov/NRSS.
c 49 CFR 571. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-V/part-571/subpart-B?toc=1.
d IIHS-HLDI crash testing and highway safety. “Test Protocols and Technical Information.” Accessed May 9, 2024. https://www.iihs.org/ratings/about-our-tests/test-protocols-and-technical-information.
e National Center for Statistics and Analysis. 2023, December. “Traffic Safety Facts 2021: A Compilation of Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Data. DOT HS 813 527. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
crash situations.f Federal standards do not dictate designs but require manufacturers to come up with cost-effective designs that deliver the required performance. Initial steps in this process may require research that supports design teams in the development of marketable products.
This research can be performed in-house and under contract with specialty laboratories. Some precompetitive projects might be executed in collaboration with universities or with other auto manufacturers through the Alliance for Automotive Innovation or the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR).
The research can be both basic and applied. Basic research may be exploratory, without focus on a specific product or meeting an established performance standard. Tools include theoretical analysis based on mathematical models and computer simulation or small-scale physical testing.
As the research moves toward product development (e.g., in the case where the target is meeting a new or revised FMVSS), the manufacture’s research team initiates a project idea or a draft proposal addressing emerging safety requirements or trends. The draft proposal is discussed internally for alignment with both safety and corporate needs and potential for internal funding.
If a research project is approved, a research led team will be established and key affected cross functional stakeholders inside the firm will be identified and brought into the collaboration. If the research project is an advanced safety technology development, a downstream project champion will also be identified, who is typically part of product development, that is, the receiver of the research products. The stakeholders—from research to manufacturing to marketing to design studio to system engineering, etc.—are in the same organization and closely follow the research efforts. These close relationships can facilitate communication and collaboration, thereby increasing the likelihood that the end product will be suitable for implementation in the production process.
Based on internal feedback, the lead team prepares a final proposal with well-defined deliverables, timeline, and required budget for execution. The project team will bring the researchers, practitioners or project champion, and other key cross-functional and cross-attribute stakeholders together for regular project reviews and status update meetings throughout the life of the project to keep the research effort focused and ensure success.
This is different from both biomedicine and road safety research, in that the cross-functional team spans responsibilities from basic research to design, manufacturing, finance and marketing, and all participants are within the same company, making the translation process more efficient and all but ensuring that the product of the research will be both feasible and acceptable for deployment.
Research in this applied phase may be in the form of modeling and simulation, biomechanics analysis, and component, subsystem and full-scale crash testing. Industry laboratories are broadly capable of testing and evaluation, but some specialized work may be performed by contract entities, including universities.
A typical research cycle might include these phases:
__________________
f 49 CFR 571, https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-V/part-571/subpart-B?toc=1.
- The first phase of the project is the initiation, including concept selection, developing test specifications and requirements, setting functional performance requirements and targets, ending at a Concept Readiness demonstration to confirm technology feasibility through simulations, hardware testing, or a combination of both.
- The second phase starts with development of hardware and/or software, assesses prototype packaging, system integration and testing, risk assessment and environmental testing, validation testing, and ends at an Application Readiness demonstration.
- In the third phase, the prototype hardware of the technology is completed, evaluated for performance through physical testing in a subsystem or full vehicle simulations, and the technology prototype is integrated into a vehicle for performance and readiness evaluation. At this stage the effectiveness of the technology prototype has been demonstrated to show that it meets performance targets and is ready for transfer to the product development team or the downstream recipient for product implementation.
- The final phase is transferring the technology to downstream recipient or implementation team. This team takes the technology through the Implementation Readiness milestone, continuing design refinement, design verification, failure modes analyses, cross attribute evaluations and much more.
Through these phases, the developing technology is handed off between specialty teams, advancing it systematically toward manufacturing.
Unlike the crash countermeasures effectiveness evaluation in road safety, vehicle safety technology effectiveness must be demonstrated in a full vehicle crash test, sled
SUMMARY
Translational science, as it has emerged in biomedical science, aims to expedite and improve the effectiveness of the process of translating basic scientific discoveries into practical applications, so that the outcomes of research can more significantly and directly enhance health care services and human health. The five-stage process of research translation as discussed in this chapter shows how research activities are transitioned from one stage to another, influencing and building upon each other.
In the field of road safety, translational science has yet to be recognized as a systematic process for linking experience on the road with both crashes and the effectiveness of prior safety research products, and for helping researchers learn what works and what does not. While research and practice are informally connected, there are not yet structure paths for informing researchers about field experience, and for helping practitioners better understand the methods, requirements, and limitations of research.
tests including crash dummies, simulations, or in test track feature evaluations. The safety technology must meet or exceed all regulatory requirements. However, the true field effectiveness of the implemented safety technologies can only be measured through real-world field performance over several years.
This end-to-end process is organized to increase the likelihood that a research product will find its way into a completed vehicle headed for market. Naturally, not every research result will make the grade. Feasibility of manufacture, performance confidence level, and market acceptance will play roles in the decision to move research products to the showroom floor. Of course, research targeted at meeting FMVSS must find success. Adaptations may take place in the product development process, which may send components and systems back to testing and evaluation stages.
Completed vehicle designs are subjected to self-certification against the mandated safety protocols mainly through crash testing before those vehicles reach dealers and customers.
In addition, vehicles are subjected to third-party crashworthiness and crash avoidance testing under NHTSA’s New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) Star Rating System and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) Top Safety Pick and Top Safety Pick Plus ratings. Generally, these third-party consumer testing protocols follow more stringent requirements than those mandated in the FMVSS, raising the bar on vehicle safety performance. Third-party testing has a profound impact on industry decisions to implement advanced safety designs to enhance real-world safety beyond the regulations. This mandatory, full-scale product testing provides clear and public feedback to the research, design, and manufacturing teams in the motor vehicle industry, completing the cycle between research and outcomes that makes for a tightly integrated research translation process.
Successful research translation requires systems thinking to ensure a strong understanding of internal and external forces that can affect the outcomes of interventions. It also requires a commitment to transparency to make methods and data available for broader review and feedback. Finally, the continuous improvement of the research translation process benefits from guidance from relevant theoretical frameworks.31 These frameworks aid in research translation by developing effective strategies, improving existing programs, and demonstrating the outcomes of resource investment, and by defining explicit benchmarks for success, such as accuracy, utility, and feasibility.32
Like research in medicine, research in road safety is typically built on empirical studies, experiments, and demonstrations of interventions, but research translation tends to be less structured in terms methods and
___________________
assessment processes. Following the biomedical example, frequent and persistent communication throughout the project life cycle may bridge gaps between traditional silos, resulting in more effective and efficient translation. For example, the establishment of forums and contexts for promoting routine interaction between the research and practitioner communities could serve to make the sharing of knowledge more effective and efficient. By fostering effective partnerships, researchers and practitioners can jointly create knowledge, seamlessly integrating it into impactful policies and routine practices and thus improving transportation safety.
