ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Usability of Norm Values on Results from a Simulator Device and Cognitive Tests in Traffic Medicine.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Driving is an essential everyday task for most adults, and fitness to continue car-driving after a brain injury/disease is a common issue in rehabilitation settings. There is no consensus on how this assessment should be performed and thus further research and development are of great value. The aim was to study the usability of cut-off values, based on recently developed norm values for a driving simulator device (CyberSiM), as well as cognitive tests, for patients already considered fit-to-drive after a standardized traffic medical investigation. Methods: The study had a retrospective case-control design. Norm results (n = 129) were compared with patient results (n = 126) divided into two age groups (≤59 years and ≥60 years). Results from Useful Field of View, Trail Making Test, Nordic Stroke Driver Screening Assessment as well as a simulator device (CyberSiM) were compared. Results: The group of patients considered fit-to-drive after a traffic medicine assessment had worse results on all cognitive tests compared with norms. Results on CyberSiM subtests II and III did not differ from norms. The proportion of patients within suggested cut-off limits (mean±2SD norm) and considered fit to drive (mean±2SD norm) were highest (75-95%) for all three subtests of CyberSiM and for Useful Field of View in both age groups. Conclusion: Availability of norm values in decision on continued driving is of value when interpreting the results of cognitive assessments sensitive to age, but it must be handled with care because many factors are important for individuals' ability to drive.
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.