ReviewCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2010
Approach to assessing fitness to drive in patients with cardiac and cognitive conditions.
Review in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Driving Assessment for Persons with Dementia: How and when?Aging and disease · 2023Review
- Relationship between self-perceived driving ability and neuropsychological performance in neurological and psychiatric patients.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Determining the causes of postural hypotension.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018Article
- Preliminary observations on MRI correlates of driving independence and performance in persons with heart failure.The International journal of neuroscience · 2015Article
- Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive.Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ · 2013Article
- Papers that might change your practice: review of the introduction of a new screening tool for the identification of cognitively impaired medically at-risk drivers.Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ · 2011Article
- Challenges and achievements in caring for the elderly.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo help physicians become more comfortable assessing the fitness to drive of patients with complex cardiac and cognitive conditions. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: The approach described is based on the authors' clinical practices, recommendations from the Third Canadian Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia, and guidelines from the 2003 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference. MAIN MESSAGE: When assessing fitness to drive in patients with multiple, complex health problems, physicians should divide conditions that might affect driving into acute intermittent (ie, not usually present on examination) and chronic persistent (ie, always present on examination) medical conditions. Physicians should address acute intermittent conditions first, to allow time for recovery from chronic persistent features that might be reversible. Decisions regarding fitness to drive in acute intermittent disorders are based on probability of recurrence; decisions in chronic persistent disorders are based on functional assessment.
conclusionAssessing fitness to drive is challenging at the best of times. When patients have multiple comorbidities, assessment becomes even more difficult. This article provides clinicians with systematic approaches to work through such complex cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21075991PMC2980427W2097117136What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.