Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39584945›Full record

ReviewGeriatrics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Understanding Elderly Drivers' Perception of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems: A Systematic Review of Perceived Risks, Trust, Ease of Use, and Usefulness.

Federica Biassoni, Martina Gnerre

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Visual Impairment and Driving in Older Adults: A Narrative Review.Current treatment options in neurology · 2026
    Review
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

2 authors.

Federica BiassoniTraffic Psychology Research Unit, Department of Psychology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Largo Gemelli 1, 20123 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0375-2211
Martina GnerreTraffic Psychology Research Unit, Department of Psychology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Largo Gemelli 1, 20123 Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElderly drivers often face safety challenges due to age-related declines in cognitive, sensory, and motor functions. Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) offer a potential solution by enhancing safety and mobility. OBJECTIVES AND

methodThis systematic review investigates the factors influencing the perception and usage of ADAS among elderly drivers, focusing on perceived safety, usefulness, trust, and ease of use.

resultsOlder adults show a preference for Level 1 ADAS, which they perceive as safer. Although they acknowledge the usefulness of ADAS in supporting their autonomy, skepticism remains regarding higher-level systems, primarily due to concerns about reliability and invasiveness. Trust and ease of use are essential factors influencing their acceptance. The review identifies common themes and barriers to the adoption of these technologies and emphasizes the need for senior-friendly interfaces and targeted training. The findings indicate that addressing these issues can significantly improve the safety and mobility of elderly drivers. The successful adoption of ADAS among older adults depends on balancing safety, control, and ease of use, with gradual and supportive integration fostering greater acceptance and trust.

conclusionsThis study outlines practical implications for stakeholders, emphasizing the need for user-friendly ADAS design, public awareness campaigns, government incentives, insurance discounts, and community training to enhance adoption among older drivers.

Indexed as

ADASolder driversrisk perceptiontraffic psychology

Identifiers

PMID39584945
PMCPMC11587038

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.