Main Page Content

Youth in Windsor-Essex County who drove in the past 12 months and their driving behaviours are represented below. 

Table 1: Percentage of Youth Who Drove a Motor Vehicle in the Past 12 Months, 2009-2010

  % 95% CI
Yes drove 72.7 62.9-80.7
No did not drive 23.0 E 15.6-35.6
Not stated NR NR

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.
NR= Not reportable due to high sampling variability. 

Table 2: Percentage of Youth Who Report Fastening Their Seat Belt While Driving a Motor Vehicle, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Always fastened 90.3 82.4-94.9
Fastened most of the time 9.2 E 4.7-17.2

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.
Note: Other types of frequencies of seatbelt use (e.g., rarely, never) were not reportable due to low cell counts or high sampling variability.

Table 3: How Often Youth Report Using a Cell Phone While Driving a Motor Vehicle (Excluding Hands-Free Use), 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Often NR  NR
Sometimes NR   NR
Rarely  22.1 E 14.1-32.7
Never 52.9  41.0-64.4

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.
NR = Not reportable due to high sampling variability.

Table 4: How Often Youth Report Driving When Feeling Tired, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Often  NR NR
Sometimes 12.3 E 6.9-21.0
Rarely 51.9 40.6-63.1
Never 28.3 E 19.7-38.7

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.

Table 5: Youth Self-Reported Driving Speed in Comparison to Other Drivers’ Speed, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
A little faster 44.7 31.1-59.1
About the same speed 43.8 31.9-56.5
A little slower 11.5 E 5.5-22.5

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.

Table 6: Youth Self-Reported Driving Aggression in Comparison to Other Drivers’ Aggression, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Much more aggressive  NR NR
A little more aggressive  19.7 E 10.2-34.7
About the same 45.5 33.5-58.1
A little less aggressive 24.3 E 15.3-36.3
Much less aggressive NR NR

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.
NR = Not reportable due to high sampling variability.

Table 7: Percentage of Youth Who Report, in the Last 12 Months, Driving a Motor Vehicle After Two or More Drinks in the Hour Before Driving, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Yes NR NR
No 93.4 85.2-97.2

NR = Not reportable due to high sampling variability.

Table 8: Percentage of Youth Who Report, in the Last 12 Months, Being the Passenger of a Driver Who Has Had Two or More Drinks in the Hour Before Driving, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Yes 22.2 E 15.3-31.1
No 77.8 68.9-84.7

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.

Table 9: Percentage of Youth Who Use Their Seatbelt When They are the Front Seat Passenger, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Always 87.3 77.2-93.3
Most of the time NR NR
Rarely NR NR
Never NR NR

NR = Not reportable due to high sampling variability.

Table 10: Percentage of Youth Who Use Their Seatbelt When They are a Back Seat Passenger, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Always 66.3 52.1-78.0
Most of the time 20.6 E 11.0-35.3
Rarely NR NR
Never NR NR
Do not ride in the back seat NR NR

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.
NR = Not reportable due to high sampling variability.

Table 11: Percentage of Youth Who Drove or were a Passenger on a Snowmobile, Motor Boat, or Sea-doo within the Past 12 months, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Yes driver or passenger 22.9 E 15.6-32.2
No 77.2 67.8-84.4

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.

Table 12: Percentage of Youth Who Drove or were a Passenger on an All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) in the past 12 months, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Yes driver or passenger 18.1 E 11.5-27.4
No 81.9 72.6-88.6

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.

Table 13: Frequency of Helmet use Reported by Youth ATV Users When Asked How Often They Wore a Helmet When on an ATV, 2009-2010
  % 95% CI
Always 50.6 E 23.5-77.4
Most of the time NR NR
Rarely NR NR
Never NR NR

E Interpret with caution due to high sampling variability.
NR = Not reportable due to high sampling variability.

Data Notes

1. Data Source: Canadian Community Health Survey, [2009-2010], Share File, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care

2. The Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) collects data through participant self-report. Data collected through self-report can be biased due to inaccurate memory or because of social desirability. Social desirability happens when individuals answer questions in a manner that they think will be viewed favourably, and is more likely to occur when individuals are answering sensitive questions.

3. For Tables 2 to 13 Not Stated, Not Applicable, and Don’t Know responses were excluded from analysis.

4. Individuals participating in this cycle of the CCHS were asked about their use of hands-free devices while driving. However, when this data is analyzed for youth only, values are not reportable due to high sampling variability or low cell counts.  

5. Data is for the Windsor-Essex County population aged 16 to 24.

6. 95% CI = 95% confidence interval. The 95% confidence interval provides a range within which we are 95% confident that the true population proportion (%) falls. If a stated result percentage is 18% with a 95% CI of 15.0-21.0%, we can be 95% confident that the true percentage lies within the range of 15.0% to 21.0%. The wider the confidence interval, the more variability there is, and the less precise the estimate.

7. The geographical area of Windsor-Essex County represents the population of the entire county of Essex and includes all municipalities within the county.