Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20396511›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2010

Medicolegal assessment of the ability to drive a motor vehicle in persons with epilepsy.

Monika Gube, Werner Ell, Johannes Schiefer, Thomas Kraus

Abstract readCase ReportsReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Having witnesses present.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2010
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Monika GubeInstitut für Arbeitsmedizin und Sozialmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Germany.
Werner Ell
Johannes Schiefer
Thomas Kraus

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDetermining whether a patient with epilepsy ought to be allowed to drive a motor vehicle is a challenging matter for the physician. This situation is fraught with medicolegal uncertainties, not just for general practitioners, but also for specialists and occupational health physicians.

methodsA case is reported and discussed in the light of a selective review of the literature and the German medicolegal assessment guidelines for the determination of the ability to drive a motor vehicle.

resultsThe risk associated with driving can be estimated as a function of the type of epilepsy from which the patient suffers and of the frequency of seizures. The expert can then express an opinion on the basis of this assessment, within the framework of the German medicolegal assessment guidelines and the German Driver Licensing Act ("Fahrerlaubnisverordnung"). There is no general duty of physicians to report a patient's unsuitability for driving a motor vehicle, but physicians have a right to report to the authorities that a patient should not be allowed to drive when the patient fails to comply with a recommendation not to drive and when a higher legally protected interest is at risk.

conclusionsThe drawbacks of secondary prevention, as illustrated by the case presented here, could be minimized if the treating physician took the patient's occupational history and gave the relevant advice early on in the course of the patient's illness. Likewise, early counseling about driving would lessen the need for physicians to tell the authorities that patients should not drive in cases where the public interest overrides the patient's right to confidentiality.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationAccidents, OccupationalAccidents, TrafficAnticonvulsantsAutomobile DrivingCarbamazepineDeceptionEligibility DeterminationEpilepsyEpilepsy, Complex PartialExpert TestimonyGermanyGuidelines as TopicHumansLicensureMaleAnticonvulsantsCarbamazepine

Identifiers

PMID20396511
PMCPMC2855176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.