Pre-driving evaluation of a teen with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death among teens, and those teens with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder (ADHD/ASD) may have a greater crash risk. PURPOSE: This case study compared the pre-driving skills of a teen with ADHD/ASD to an age- and gender-matched healthy control (HC). METHOD: Data were collected from performance on clinical tests and on a driving simulator. FINDINGS: The main impairments of the teen with ADHD/ASD were the ability to shift attention, perform simple sequential tasks, integrate visual-motor responses, and coordinate motor responses, whereas the HC demonstrated intact skills in these abilities. The teen with ADHD/ASD made 44 driving errors during the drive, and the HC made 17. The teen with ADHD/ASD had more lane maintenance, visual scanning, and speeding errors compared to the HC. IMPLICATIONS: Teens with ADHD/ASD may have more pre-driving deficits and may require a certified driving rehabilitation specialist to assess readiness to drive, but a larger study is needed to confirm this.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".