Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33680259›Full record

ArticleCanadian geriatrics journal : CGJ2021

The SIMARD-MD is not an Effective Driver Screening Tool for Determining Fitness-To-Drive.

Alexander M Crizzle, Nadia Mullen, Diane Mychael, Natasha Meger, Ryan Toxopeus, Carrie Gibbons, Simeon Ostap, Sacha Dubois, Michel Bédard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ, 2021. 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. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Alexander M CrizzleSchool of Public Health, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Nadia MullenCentre for Research on Safe Driving, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada.
Diane MychaelSt. Joseph's Health Centre Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Natasha MegerSaskatchewan Health Authority, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Ryan ToxopeusSchool of Public Health, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Carrie GibbonsCentre for Applied Health Research, St. Joseph's Care Group, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada.
Simeon OstapCentre for Research on Safe Driving, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada.
Sacha DuboisCentre for Research on Safe Driving, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada.
Michel BédardCentre for Research on Safe Driving, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies have reported poor sensitivity and specificity of the Screen for the Identification of Cognitively Impaired Medically At-Risk Drivers, a modification of the DemTech (SIMARD-MD) to screen for drivers with cognitive impairment. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the SIMARD-MD can accurately predict pass/fail on a road test in drivers with cognitive impairment (CI) and healthy drivers.

methodsData from drivers with CI were collected from two comprehensive driving assessment centres (n=86) and compared with healthy drivers (n=30). All participants completed demographic measures, clinical measures, and a road rest (pass/fail). Analyses consisted of correlations between the SIMARD-MD and the other clinical measures, and a receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curve to determine the predictive ability of the SIMARD-MD.

resultsAll healthy drivers passed the road test compared with 44.2% of the CI sample. On the SIMARD-MD, the CI sample scored significantly worse than healthy drivers (

conclusionsGiven the high level of misclassification, the SIMARD-MD should not be used with either healthy drivers or those with cognitive impairment for making decisions about driving.

Indexed as

cognitive impairmentcomprehensive driving evaluationdementiadriving performanceolder driverssensitivitySIMARD-MDspecificity

Identifiers

PMID33680259
PMCPMC7904326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.