ArticleJAMA network open2024
Reporting Requirements, Confidentiality, and Legal Immunity for Physicians Who Report Medically Impaired Drivers.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of Return to Driving in Patients With Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.Occupational therapy international · 2026Pooled it
- State Department of Motor Vehicles Reporting Mandates of Dementia Diagnoses and Dementia Underdiagnosis.JAMA network open · 2024Article
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
Importance: Physicians play an important role in assessing patients' ability to drive. There is a dearth of peer-reviewed information on policies regarding physician reporting of medically impaired drivers. Objective: To investigate state reporting requirements and the availability of confidentiality and legal immunity for physicians who report medically impaired drivers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was conducted from November 1 to 30, 2022, in 3 rounds. First, all 50 US states' Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) websites were systematically reviewed. Second, DMV staff from each state were surveyed via telephone. Third, each state's legal codes for driver licensing were reviewed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome measures included the percentage of states with mandatory and voluntary reporting policies, reporting instructions on DMV websites, anonymous reporting options, and legal immunity for reporting physicians, in addition to characteristics of states' mandatory reporting policies (ie, types of medical conditions that require reporting) and policies surrounding the confidentiality of reports. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: One-third of state DMV websites (17 [34%]) lacked instructions regarding physician reporting. Six states had mandatory reporting requirements; 4 of these states only required reporting of conditions characterized by lapses of consciousness. Only 3 states (6%) accepted anonymous reports, and 7 states (14%) deemed physician reports of medically impaired drivers confidential without exception. Nearly one-third of states (15 [30%]) deemed reports by physicians confidential, with the exception that reported drivers could find out who reported them if they asked for a copy of the reporting form. Most states (37 [74%]) had statutes that protected physicians from liability related to reporting medically impaired drivers. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of state reporting requirements regarding medically impaired drivers found many differences in state policies regarding mandatory reporting and the conditions that require reporting. There was also limited availability of online reporting instructions, anonymous reporting options, and legal protections for reporting physicians.
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.