There is no conflict of interest.
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Lifejackets for Lobstermen program on safety outcomes.
- The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare the behaviors and attitudes regarding personal flotation devices (PFDs) use of lobster fishermen who participated in the program to those who did not participate in the program. Using survey data and statistical tests, the authors compared differences in outcomes between the groups before and after the program.
- The study did not find statistically significant relationships between the Lifejackets for Lobstermen program and behaviors and attitudes regarding PFD use.
- This study receives a low evidence rating. This means we are not confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the Lifejackets for Lobstermen program; other factors would have likely contributed. However, the study did not find statistically significant effects.
Features of the Intervention
The Lifejackets for Lobstermen program was created by researchers to encourage commercial lobster fishermen in Maine and Massachusetts to use personal flotation devices (PFDs). This social marketing campaign included ads designed for fishermen across different platforms such as TV, radio, social media, posters, and print ads. Additionally, the team visited lobster fishing ports to sell PFDs directly to fishermen at a 50% discount.
Features of the Study
The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of participants in the Lifejackets for Lobstermen program to a comparison group who did not participate in the program. To take part in the study, participants had to be at least 18 years old, intend to set and haul traps within a year after the post-intervention survey, and expect to fish for at least two more years. Participants were randomly selected from a list of commercial lobstering license holders. In Maine and Massachusetts, the sample was split into three areas for intervention and three areas for comparison. The treatment group included 138 participants from 50 ports that received the intervention, while the comparison group included 124 participants from 59 ports that did not receive the intervention. In the sample, 98.6% of the participants were men, with an average age of 54.4 years. They had an average of 32.7 years of fishing experience, and the typical crew size was 1.3 people.
The intervention took place from April 1, 2019 to October 23, 2019. Lobster fishermen at the treatment ports were visited by the Lifejackets for Lobstermen team during the treatment period and also saw promotional materials for the program. In contrast, lobster fishermen at the comparison ports did not get visits from the Lifejackets for Lobstermen team during this time.
The study used pre- and post-intervention surveys to assess lobster fishermen's attitudes and behaviors regarding PFD use. The pre-intervention surveys were administered before the visits to the treatment ports, and the post-intervention surveys after the visits to the treatment ports. The surveys targeted the licensed vessel captains to assess changes in their PFD usage and their willingness to implement a PFD policy for their crew. The authors categorized the captains' behaviors along a "Stage of Change" continuum, which included six stages ranging from maintenance, where captains wore PFDs 100% of the time, to pre-contemplation, where they did not use them or believed PFDs were unimportant. The surveys also assessed the usage of PFDs among captains and crew members. The pre-intervention surveys gathered demographic details about the crew, information regarding the boat, and insights into fishing practices, such as how far they fished from the shore. The authors used statistical tests to compare differences in outcomes between the treatment and comparison groups.
Findings
Health and safety
- The study did not find a significant relationship between the Lifejackets for Lobstermen program and attitudes and behaviors regarding PFD use.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors noted that they were unable to control or restrict the comparison groups’ exposure to the social marketing materials for the Lifejackets for Lobstermen campaign. The comparison group’s exposure to the intervention may explain the lack of differences in outcomes between the groups. Also, the authors did not account for preexisting differences between the treatment and comparison groups before program participation or include sufficient control variables in their analyses. These preexisting differences between the groups—and not the Lifejackets for Lobstermen program—could explain the observed outcomes. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs.
Causal Evidence Rating
Research Guidelines
Review Protocol: Living Systematic Annual Search and Review Protocol
Review Guidelines: Causal Evidence Guidelines