An Evaluation of the Methodology and Results of J. P. Goldstein's Study, "the Effects of Motorcycle Helmet Use On the Probability of Fatality and the Severity of Head and Neck Injuries"

Abstract

The motorcycle helmet effectiveness study conducted by J. P. Goldstein (1986) suggests that there exists a possible "trade-off" between head and neck injuries for a potential helmet user. Some groups have cited this study and have suggested that the current status of the mandatory helmet usage law in Alberta be reviewed. In this article, methodology and results of Goldstein's study are presented and evaluated, and evidence from other studies is presented. Due to methodological weaknesses in Goldstein's study, its results cannot be relied upon for policy formulation, particularly the repeal ofmandatory helmet legislation. Evidence from other studies provides no conclusive evidence of the trade-off between head and neck injuries for a motorcyclist wearing a helmet. The review of other studies indicates that helmets protect motorcycle riders from both head and neck injuries and that the risk of being killed is much higher jor helmetless riders. Perhaps, through helmet restraining collars or use of lighter helmets, both head and neck injuries can be further minimized.