AUTONEWS

Crash data reveal women face 60% higher injury risk than men

A study by TU Graz shows that women have a 60% higher injury risk in car accidents compared to men. This is especially true for female passengers and older women. The findings suggest that the safety systems and legal test standards should be adjusted.

Cars have become increasingly safe over the past few decades. However, not all groups of people benefit equally from this. Researchers at the Institute of Vehicle Safety at Graz University of Technology (TU Graz) have now analyzed Austrian accident data for the years 2012 to 2024 and reconstructed individual accidents in detail. The results of the study show that when two occupants of different sex are in the vehicle, women are significantly more likely to suffer injuries than men. In concrete terms, their risk of injury is greater by a factor of 1.6.

Same speed, more serious consequences...Women suffer noticeably more severe injuries than male occupants even at lower collision speeds. The risk of being seriously injured or killed is more than twice as high for them in these cases. "Our analyses show that women are injured disproportionately more often, especially in the chest, spine, arms and legs," says the project coordinator, Corina Klug from the Institute of Vehicle Safety at TU Graz. The higher injury risk for women is particularly evident in the 50+ age group.

In the study, real accidents were reconstructed and simulated with virtual human models in different sitting positions. This made it possible to objectively compare the stresses that affect the female and male body. In addition to the significantly higher risk of injury for women, the study shows that the seating position on the passenger side has a massive influence on the risk of injury. This applies to both women and men, but women are more likely to ride in the passenger seat than men.

"We've all seen a passenger seat positioned far back or even reclined. However, airbags and seat belts are not designed for such non-standard positions," explains Klug. The good news is that consumer protection (Euro NCAP) has already taken up this issue and has been carrying out tests on both dummies and human models in different seat positions since the beginning of the year.

The 'average man' as a benchmark...It is clear that there is a need to catch up with regard to the safety of women in vehicles. For decades, the 50th percentile man—the statistical "average man"—was defined as the global benchmark for safety. This male reference figure is deeply rooted in the historically evolved vehicle approval procedure and still shapes the test methods today. Models that correspond to the average male body are primarily used for the vehicle approval procedure.

Even the so-called "female" dummy is merely a scaled-down version of the male model and also corresponds to a very small woman—95% of women are taller and heavier than this reference point. This also applies to the improved dummies whose use is currently being discussed.

Specific anatomical characteristics of average women—such as pelvic width, chest circumference and shoulder geometry—are currently not realistically represented by any dummy for frontal or side crashes. Currently, there are only dummies of the average woman for rear-end collisions; these were developed as part of EU projects. But, they are not yet in use.

The study reconstructed real-life accidents, including through crash tests conducted at the Institute for Vehicle Safety at TU Graz. Credit: VSI

'Women are not little men'...The biomechanical differences therefore remain largely unconsidered methodologically, which limits the transferability of the test results to the actual injury risk of women. "Women are not little men. And models of very small, petite women are often unable to represent what we observe in the accidents," Klug summarizes.

Clear recommendations: Intelligent safety systems, more realistic tests...TU Graz derives clear recommendations from the study. Safety systems such as seat belts and airbags must become more intelligent. So-called adaptive belt-force limiters limit how strongly a belt restrains people in the event of a collision and automatically adapt these forces to the severity of the accident, the occupants' physique and sitting position.

In order for such systems to be available in more vehicles, they must also be evaluated in consumer protection and ideally in vehicle approval procedures. More realistic tests are also needed. Future approval procedures should stipulate different body shapes and more realistic seating positions.

"Virtual, biomechanically realistic human models are a key component here. We can use computer simulations to significantly expand the historically male-centered and rigid test procedures," says Klug. The virtual models are able to not only simulate a wide variety of body shapes, but also enable different seating positions in the vehicle to be analyzed without additional tests in the crash laboratory.

Positioning belts correctly...An often underestimated factor is the position of the belt on the body and the friction between the person in the car and the seat or belt. Thick winter jackets or blankets impair the transmission of force, which means that the body can slip under the belt in the event of an impact. This so-called "submarining" can lead to serious internal injuries, as the belt does not act on the stable pelvic bone but in the region of the vulnerable soft tissue.

"In addition to design measures to ensure that safe seating positions are also comfortable seating positions, more information is needed on the correct seat adjustment and belt position," emphasizes Klug. "It is important not to sit too far back, to straighten the backrest and to position the belt so that the lap belt lies on the pelvic bone and the shoulder belt runs over the collarbone. This is the best way for the restraint systems to fulfill their function and, in the case of an accident, to slow the person down as gently as possible."

The greater vulnerability of women to injuries, often cited as a 60% higher risk than men in contexts such as car accidents, is mainly due to the fact that safety systems and equipment are designed based on a male standard.

Determining factors of the increased risk (below):

Safety design and "crash dummies": For decades, the "average man" (50th percentile) was the global standard for vehicle safety testing. Female dummies are often just smaller versions of the male model, ignoring specific anatomies such as shoulder geometry, pelvic width, and chest circumference.

Anatomy and biomechanics: Women have a wider pelvis, which alters the alignment of knees and ankles (the so-called Q angle), increasing stress on the joints. In addition, neck muscles are generally weaker and head size is smaller, which increases head acceleration in impacts, increasing the risk of concussions and cervical spine injuries.

Ligament laxity and hormones: Higher estrogen levels can increase collagen elasticity, making ligaments and tendons "looser" and more susceptible to ruptures, such as ACL (Anterior Cruciate Ligament) tears, which are 2 to 8 times more common in women.

Sports equipment: Many shoes and equipment are adaptations of men's models, not respecting the morphology of the female foot or the differences in muscle mass distribution.

Women face a 60% higher risk of serious injury (especially in vehicle crashes) due to a combination of physiological differences, safety equipment designed for male bodies, and higher likelihoods of being in the passenger seat. Key factors include lower muscle mass, higher structural flexibility, and hormonal differences that affect ligament stability, alongside systemic design biases in safety technology

Key factors driving the higher injury risk(below):

Vehicle safety design: Research shows crash test dummies historically modeled the average male, leaving women more vulnerable in car accidents. Women face significantly higher risks of injury to the chest, spine, arms, and legs, partly because airbags and seat belts are not optimized for female bodies, especially when seated in the passenger side.

Anatomical & biomechanical differences: Women often have less muscle mass and higher body fat percentages. A wider pelvis creates different knee and ankle alignment (larger Q angle), which places increased pressure on surrounding joints and increases susceptibility to injuries.

Hormonal and structural vulnerability: Higher estrogen levels can increase the laxity (looseness) of tendons and ligaments, making women more prone to severe ligament injuries such as ACL tears

Bone Density and Structure: Women often have smaller, less dense bones, leading to higher rates of stress fractures and breaks during similar, high-intensity activity.

Muscular imbalances: Women are more likely to have weaker core muscles, which contributes to lower extremity injuries, particularly during puberty when limbs grow faster than the core.

These findings indicate that both biological, physiological, and design-related factors create a higher risk environment for women, particularly in high-impact scenarios.

Provided by Graz University of Technology