ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Predicting cognitive status in stroke survivors from driving performance.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 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.
- Predicting cognitive status in stroke survivors from driving performance.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to determine whether simulated driving performance can reliably predict cognitive impairment in stroke survivors.
methodsCognitively impaired (
resultsLogistic regression models correctly distinguished cognitive status in 77.5% of cases for reactive and distracted driving, and 80.9% for route planning. Notably, the route planning task also achieved the highest classification rate of cognitively impaired participants (∼70%). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses on the strongest predictors from each driving section revealed significant areas under the curve (AUCs), with optimal cutoffs identifying cognitively impaired participants at 70%-80% accuracy. DISCUSSION: These findings provide a critical foundation for developing simulator-based assessments as practical, functionally relevant screening tools for identifying cognitive impairment and determining driving readiness post-stroke. Highlights: Stroke survivors were tested on simulated driving tasks.Driving metrics were lane departures, speed, reaction time, and route accuracy.Cognitive status was predicted with greater than 75% accuracy.Simulators may be a clinical tool for assessing post-stroke driving readiness.
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.