An Exploratory Study on the Predictive Elements of Passing On-the-Road Tests for Disabled Persons
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Driving evaluations are performed by Occupational Therapists to evaluate drivers with disability. They include both off-road and on-road assessments. Many aspects of driving are examined during the on-road assessment. The main objective of this study is to identify the elements of the Occupational Therapy on-road driving assessment that are most predictive of the overall driving evaluation. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study took place at a provincially approved Driving Assessment Program. Records of 700 participants with various disabilities who completed a driving assessment between 1995 and 2003 were reviewed. Only clients who completed the on-road assessment were included in the study. At our center, 11 driving elements comprised of 34 items were used as independent variables and rated as pass (acceptable or good) or fail (borderline or poor). Analysis was completed with descriptive statistics and use of logistic regression to identify elements that contributed most significantly to the overall driving evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 628 clients completed the on-road assessment with an overall pass rate of 50%. Logistic regression modeling identified poor anticipation of road hazards, observation of environment, improper stopping position, poor visual scanning, poor knowledge of the rules of the road, and increasing age as predictive of failure for all participants. Further analysis grouped subjects according to disability to identify similarities and differences between pass/fail predictors. Both similarities and differences in predictive elements were found between cognitive and physical diagnostic groupings. Most notably, the physical diagnostic grouping showed that cognitive, not physical elements of the on-road test, predicted failure of the overall driving evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 11 elements considered in the on-road evaluation, specific cognitive ones such as anticipates potential hazards, scanning, observes for pedestrians, and proper stopping position tend to contribute more to the prediction of pass or fail than others. These elements should be considered as components of on-road assessments by other Driving Assessment Programs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».