ArticleJournal of sleep research2022
Comparing objective wakefulness and vigilance tests to on-the-road driving performance in narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia.
Article in Journal of sleep research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impaired attention in pediatric narcolepsy type 1.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2026Article
- Recommended protocols for the Multiple Sleep Latency Test and Maintenance of Wakefulness Test in children: guidance from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2024Article
- Diagnostic challenges and burden of idiopathic hypersomnia: a systematic literature review.Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2024Article
- Comparing objective wakefulness and vigilance tests to on-the-road driving performance in narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia.Journal of sleep research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with narcolepsy or idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) are at increased risk of driving accidents. Both excessive daytime sleepiness, i.e. unwanted sleep episodes during the day, and disturbed vigilance are core features of these disorders. We tested on-the-road driving performance of patients with narcolepsy or IH coming in for a routine driving fitness evaluation and examined: (1) correlations between driving performance and the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT), Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) and Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT) as objective tests; (2) the predictive power of the MWT and SART for increased risk of impaired driving; (3) the best set of objective predictors for increased risk of impaired driving. Participants were 44 patients (aged 18-75 years) with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1), type 2 (NT2) or IH. They completed the MWT, SART, PVT, a subjective sleepiness questionnaire, and a standardised on-the-road driving test. The standard deviation of the lateral position (SDLP) was used as outcome measure of driving performance. The MWT had low correlation with the SDLP (ρ = -0.41 to -0.49, p < 0.01). The SART and PVT had low correlations with SDLP (ρ = 0.30 and ρ = 0.39, respectively, both p < 0.05). The predictive power of MWT for an increased risk of impaired driving was significant, but low (area under the curve = 0.273, p = 0.012), and non-significant for SART. We conclude that in our present group, none of the tests had adequate ability to predict impaired driving, questioning their use for clinical driving fitness evaluation in narcolepsy and IH. Real-time monitoring of sleepiness while driving seems more promising in these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.