Table 2.

Pedestrian distraction and risky behaviour frequencies and unadjusted rate ratios during crossings at pedestrian MVC locations by environmental factors, driver behaviours and traffic safety features, Cluj County, Romania, 2013

Sites characteristics	Number of site	Total pedestrians observed	Distracted pedestrians			Pedestrian risky behaviours
	n	n	n	Rate	Unadjusted rate ratio (95% CI)	n	Rate	Unadjusted rate ratio (95% CI)
Location–
In Cluj-Napoca	64	1505	95	6.3	1.1 (0.6 to 2.0)	327	21.7	0.7 (0.3 to 1.5)
Outside Cluj-Napoca	36	206	12	5.8	Ref	89	43.2	Ref
Road type
National road	54	1113	76	6.8	1.3 (0.9 to 2.0)	259	23.3	0.8 (0.4 to 1.6)
Local road	46	598	31	5.2	Ref	157	26.3	Ref
Location geometry
Non-intersection	68	580	32	5.5	Ref	216	37.2	Ref
Intersection*	32	1131	75	6.6	1.2 (0.8 to 1.8)	200	18.3	0.5 (0.2–0.99)
Number of lanes, index street†
≥4	27	713	50	7.0	1.2 (0.8 to 1.8)	140	19.6	0.5 (0.2 to 1.1)
≤3	73	998	57	5.7	Ref	276	27.7	Ref
Land use in area‡
Residential
Yes	78	868	41	4.7	0.6 (0.4 to 0.9)	180	20.7	0.7 (0.3 to 1.6)
No	22	843	66	7.8	Ref	236	28.0	Ref
Business
Yes	78	1451	93	6.4	1.2 (0.7 to 2.1)	333	23.0	0.6 (0.2 to 1.6)
No	22	260	14	5.4	Ref	83	31.9	Ref
Other (recreation, farm/agriculture, vacant)
Yes	12	92	4	4.3	§	41	44.6	1.3 (0.4 to 3.9)
No	88	1619	103	6.4		375	23.2	Ref
Slope/grade
Flat	78	1556	100	6.4	Ref	396	25.4	Ref
Slight hill	13	155	7	4.5	0.7 (0.3 to 1.5)	20	12.9	0.7 (0.2 to 1.9)
Parking‡
Parallel parking
Yes	71	816	47	5.8	0.9 (0.6 to 1.3)	233	28.6	1.7 (0.8 to 3.7)
No	29	895	60	6.7	Ref	183	20.4	Ref
Diagonal parking
Yes	7	243	15	6.2	1.0 (0.6 to 1.7)	47	19.3	1.4 (0.4 to 4.8)
No	93	1468	92	6.3	Ref	369	25.1	Ref
Parking (parallel or diagonal)
Yes	76	1017	57	5.6	Ref	259	25.5	Ref
No	24	694	50	7.2	1.3 (0.9 to 1.9)	157	22.6	0.7 (0.3 to 1.8)
Motor vehicle moving violation involving pedestrian
Yes	4	123	8	6.5	1.0 (0.5 to 2.1)	16	13.0	0.5 (0.1 to 2.9)
No	95	1588	99	6.2	Ref	400	25.2	Ref
Traffic controls
Traffic light
Yes	12	855	63	7.4	1.4 (1.0 to 2.1)	196	22.9	0.9 (0.3 to 2.4)
No	88	856	44	5.1	Ref	220	25.7	Ref
Stop sign
Yes	5	94	1	1.1	§	7	7.4	0.2 (0.04 to 0.8)
No	94	1617	106	6.6		409	25.3	Ref
Yield sign
Yes	2	21	0	0	§	9	42.9	1.5 (0.2 to 13.0)
No	98	1690	107	6.3		407	24.1	ref
Unregulated
Yes	82	744	43	5.8	0.9 (0.6 to 1.3)	204	27.4	1.3 (0.6 to 3.2)
No	18	967	64	6.6	Ref	212	21.9	ref
Pedestrian facilities‡
Sidewalk, paved trail or paved shoulder
Yes	92	1690	107	6.3	§	402	23.8	0.6 (0.1 to 3.0)
No	8	21	0	0		14	66.7	ref
Painted crosswalk
Yes, with crossing sign	43	1386	90	6.5	1.3 (0.7 to 2.4)	243	17.5	0.3 (0.2 to 0.7)
No, but has crossing sign	5	81	5	6.2	1.3 (0.4 to 3.6)	27	33.3	1.3 (0.2 to 7.5)
No, and no crossing sign	52	244	12	4.9	Ref	146	59.8	Ref
Pedestrian crossing aid(s)¶
Yes	15	888	65	7.3	1.4 (1.0 to 2.1)	197	22.1	0.7 (0.3 to 1.8)
No	85	823	42	5.1	Ref	219	26.6	Ref
Surface condition
Excellent/good	75	1449	94	6.5	Ref	316	21.8	Ref
Fair/poor	25	262	13	5.0	0.8 (0.4 to 1.4)	100	38.2	1.6 (0.7 to 3.6)
Bike lane or bike warning sign
Yes	11	704	47	6.7	1.1 (0.8 to 1.6)	112	15.9	0.3 (0.1 to 0.9)
No	88	1007	60	6.0	Ref	304	30.2	Ref
	Mean per site	SD	Unadjusted rate ratio (95% CI)			Unadjusted rate ratio (95% CI)
Average motor vehicle speed (miles per hour)	28.9	10.8	0.98 (0.94 to 1.02)			0.95 (0.90 to 0.99)
Motor vehicle volume (per motor vehicle)	86.1	38.0	1.01 (1.0 to 1.02)			0.99 (0.99 to 1.00)
Distracted pedestrians (per pedestrian)	1.1	2.6	n/a			0.96 (0.86 to 1.08)
Risky crossing behaviours (per pedestrian)	4.2	8.7	1.01 (1.00 to 1.02)			n/a

^*Includes three roundabouts.

^†Based on index road where crash occurred, which was drawn from the crash data.

^‡Not mutually exclusive.

Rate=per 100 observed pedestrians.

^§Rate ratio not computed due to small cell sizes.

^¶Pedestrian signal, push button, refuge island and/or flashing light.