logoalt Hacker News

biophysboyyesterday at 8:23 PM3 repliesview on HN

Coming from a bio background, I’ve always been confused why auto fatality stats are normalized per miles driven. Epidemiological metrics like incidence or prevalence seem like they would work fine? Town A would be “safer” than town B if people’s commutes are 20% shorter, even if accidents occur w same frequency


Replies

Aloisiustoday at 12:15 AM

Pretty sure I've seen exposure-adjusted incidence rates used in clinical trials.

Miles is simply a proxy for exposure.

Given risk here does vary by exposure time and trip length varies so much, it seems reasonable to use - at least in combination with crude rates.

show 1 reply
_vertigoyesterday at 8:25 PM

What are some other better ways to normalize?

show 2 replies
andrepdyesterday at 11:20 PM

Because it yields a simple corollary that to make travelling safer you can reduce the number of miles driven. Mostly by giving people viable alternatives to driving, be it long-distance rail or bike lanes to move around quicker and safer in the city.