CSIRO Publishing blank image blank image blank image blank imageBooksblank image blank image blank image blank imageJournalsblank image blank image blank image blank imageAbout Usblank image blank image blank image blank imageShopping Cartblank image blank image blank image You are here: Journals > Health Promotion Journal of Australia   
Health Promotion Journal of Australia
  Journal of the Australian Health Promotion Association
blank image Search
blank image blank image
blank image
  Advanced Search

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Structure
For Advertisers
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Research Fronts
Virtual Issues
Sample Issue
Call for Papers
For Authors
General Information
Author Instructions
Open Access
Awards and Prizes
For Referees
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates
Library Recommendation

red arrow Submit Article
blank image
Use the online submission system to send us your paper.

blue arrow e-Alerts
blank image
Subscribe to our Email Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

red arrow Connect with CP
blank image
facebook twitter logo LinkedIn

red arrow Connect with HPJA
blank image


Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 22(3)

The possible effect on frequency of cycling if mandatory bicycle helmet legislation was repealed in Sydney, Australia: a cross sectional survey

Chris Rissel and Li Ming Wen

Health Promotion Journal of Australia 22(3) 178 - 183
Published: 2011


Issue addressed: Australia has national, state and city targets to increase levels of cycling. The possible effect of repealing mandatory bicycle helmet legislation on the frequency of cycling in Sydney is examined. Methods: A cross sectional survey by a market research company was conducted, using quota sampling, in Sydney, Australia. Participants were 600 residents aged 16 years and older. Data were collected in October 2010 using computer-assisted telephone interviews from randomly sampled households, with one respondent per household. The primary outcome measures were propensity to cycle more if a helmet was not required, how often a respondent who cycled would cycle without a helmet, and opinion on compulsory wearing of bicycle helmets. Frequency of cycling, and demographic questions were also assessed. Multiple logistic regression models were run for each of the three main outcomes. Results: One in five (22.6%, 95% CI 18.8-26.4%) respondents said they would cycle more if they did not have to wear a helmet, particularly occasional cyclists (40.4% of those who had cycled in the past week and 33.1% of those who had cycled in the past month). Almost half (47.6%) of respondents said they would never ride without a helmet, 14.4% said ?all the time?, 30.4% said ?some of the time? and the rest were not sure. One third (32.7%, 95% CI 28.5-37.0%) of respondents did not support mandatory helmet legislation. Conclusions: While a hypothetical situation, if only half of the 22.6% of respondents who said they would cycle more if they did not have to wear a helmet did ride more, Sydney targets for increasing cycling would be achieved by repealing mandatory bicycle helmet legislation. A significant proportion of the population would continue to wear helmets even if they were not required to do so. Key words: bicycle, cycling, helmet, legislation, physical activity

Full text doi:10.1071/HE11178

© Australian Health Promotion Association 2011

blank image
Subscriber Login

PDF (85 KB) $25
 Export Citation
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help


© CSIRO 1996-2016