Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36526731›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Olfactory discrimination and identification as prognostic markers of fitness-to-drive in older drivers.

Katerina Touliou, Nicos Maglaveras, Evangelos Bekiaris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Katerina TouliouCERTH/ HIT, 57001, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Nicos MaglaverasSchool of Medicine, AUTh, 54124, Thessaloniki, Greece. nicmag@med.auth.gr.
Evangelos BekiarisCERTH/ HIT, 57001, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The necessity for reliable, standardized and validated fitness to drive assessment tools for older drivers have been highlighted and discussed for over three decades. Existing neuropsychological tests of driving performance are focusing mostly on visuo-spatial attention and executive functioning rather than other senses. Over the last decade, olfactory deterioration has been found to be associated with cognitive decline and predicting transition from mild cognitive impairment to dementia. The AGILE fitness to drive battery is standardized for older drivers. In this study it was adapted to include the olfactory Sniff' and Stick's test. The aim was to investigate the value of relevant deficits as predictive markers of driving ability in three driving groups (older drivers with: (a) no impairment (controls), (b) with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and (c) MCI and other chronic conditions, i.e., comorbidities). So far, no other study has investigated the predictive value of olfactory deficits in driving ability. The findings revealed that discrimination is important for the first year of the examination and as the decline progresses, identification becomes the better olfactory marker. The latter is also evident in the literature. Hence, the results showed that less indicators are required compared to the initial battery. The olfactory markers were dominant over the neuropsychological tests, apart from alertness, for predicting the older driver's fitness to drive regardless of the presence of cognitive impairment and other chronic conditions.

Indexed as

Automobile DrivingCognitive DysfunctionAgedAttentionHumansNeuropsychological TestsPrognosisSmell

Identifiers

PMID36526731
PMCPMC9757633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.