Next Article in Journal
Synchronized Humanitarian, Military and Commercial Logistics: An Evolving Synergistic Partnership
Previous Article in Journal
Can Complexity-Thinking Methods Contribute to Improving Occupational Safety in Industry 4.0? A Review of Safety Analysis Methods and Their Concepts

Observing Patterns of River Usage

Royal Life Saving Society–Australia, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia
College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, 4811, Australia
School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2033, Australia
School of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Nottingham, Jalan Broga, 43500 Semenyih, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Safety 2019, 5(4), 66;
Received: 11 July 2019 / Revised: 18 September 2019 / Accepted: 29 September 2019 / Published: 4 October 2019
Rivers are a leading location for drowning, yet little is known about people’s usage of these waterways. This pilot study aimed to test the use of direct observations to calculate river usage. Direct observations were conducted at regular intervals within defined zones at four river drowning locations in Australia (including weekends and the Australia Day national public holiday). Data recorded were date and time of observation; total people (including males, females, children, and adults); and number of people on, in, and beside the water. Univariate analysis with mean (SD) and range was conducted. Interrater reliability for observations was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (one-way random-effects, average measures model), with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Across 149 time points, 309 observations resulted in 13,326 river interactions observed by multiple observers. There was an average of 39 people (M = 39.4, SD = 29.4, range = 0–137) per observation, 44 people (M = 44.2, SD = 32.7, range = 0–37) on an average weekend, and 97 people (M = 96.8, SD = 58.1, range = 20–190) on Australia Day. More females (M = 20.6, SD = 16.0, range = 0–83) than males (M = 18.3, SD = 14.5, range = 0–68) were observed. More people were observed in the water (M = 20.6, SD = 20.4, range = 0–84) than beside or on the water. Interrater reliability was excellent, consistently above 0.900 for all variables collected (apart from the variable of beside the river). Despite males accounting for 80% of river drowning fatalities, more females were observed than males. Increased visitation on the Australia Day public holiday may be linked to increased drowning risk. This study detailed a simple approach to data collection, exploring exposure within a defined zone at river locations. River usage is dynamic, with people’s movement in and out of the water changing their risk exposure. Observational-based data collection for drowning, particularly for rivers, is an important yet highly neglected area of research. View Full-Text
Keywords: drowning; rivers; exposure; observational studies; intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC); error; Australia; risk drowning; rivers; exposure; observational studies; intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC); error; Australia; risk
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Peden, A.E.; Franklin, R.C.; Leggat, P.A.; Lindsay, D. Observing Patterns of River Usage. Safety 2019, 5, 66.

AMA Style

Peden AE, Franklin RC, Leggat PA, Lindsay D. Observing Patterns of River Usage. Safety. 2019; 5(4):66.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Peden, Amy E., Richard C. Franklin, Peter A. Leggat, and Daniel Lindsay. 2019. "Observing Patterns of River Usage" Safety 5, no. 4: 66.

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop