ArticleInjury epidemiology2024
R2DRV: study protocol for longitudinal assessment of driving after mild TBI in young drivers.
Article in Injury epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence automated solution for hazard annotation and eye tracking in a simulated environment.Accident; analysis and prevention · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and traffic-related injuries are two major public health problems disproportionately affecting young people. Young drivers, whose driving skills are still developing, are particularly vulnerable to impaired driving due to brain injuries. Despite this, there is a paucity of research on how mTBI impacts driving and when it is safe to return to drive after an mTBI. This paper describes the protocol of the study, R2DRV, Longitudinal Assessment of Driving After Mild TBI in Young Drivers, which examines the trajectory of simulated driving performance and self-reported driving behaviors from acutely post-injury to symptom resolution among young drivers with mTBI compared to matched healthy drivers. Additionally, this study investigates the associations of acute post-injury neurocognitive function and cognitive load with driving among young drivers with and without mTBI.
methodsA total of 200 young drivers (ages 16 to 24) are enrolled from two study sites, including 100 (50 per site) with a physician-confirmed isolated mTBI, along with 100 (50 per site) healthy drivers without a history of TBI matched 1:1 for age, sex, driving experience, and athlete status. The study assesses primary driving outcomes using two approaches: (1) high-fidelity driving simulators to evaluate driving performance across four experimental study conditions at multiple time points (within 96 h of injury and weekly until symptom resolution or 8 weeks post-injury); (2) daily self-report surveys on real-world driving behaviors completed by all participants. DISCUSSION: This study will fill critical knowledge gaps by longitudinally assessing driving performance and behaviors in young drivers with mTBI, as compared to matched healthy drivers, from acutely post-injury to symptom resolution. The research strategy enables evaluating how increased cognitive load may exacerbate the effects of mTBI on driving, and how post-mTBI neurocognitive deficits may impact the driving ability of young drivers. Findings will be shared through scientific conferences, peer-reviewed journals, and media outreach to care providers and the public.
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.