MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039907663 · doi:10.2182/cjot.2011.2.6

Participant Feedback and Satisfaction with the UQDRIVE Groups for Driving Cessation

2011· article· en· W2039907663 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Louise Gustafsson, Jacki Liddle, Shunwei Lua, Melanie Hoyle, Nancy A. Pachana, Geoffrey Mitchell, Kryss McKenna

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialSmoking cessationPsychologyLife satisfactionApplied psychologySocial supportDepression (economics)MedicineNursingPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Driving cessation can lead to negative consequences, such as depression and reduced social activities. PURPOSE: The University of Queensland Driver Retirement Initiative (UQDRIVE) intensive support program is a six-week program to assist older people with driving cessation. METHODS: Fifty-five participants completed a survey of satisfaction with the program, including identification of the aspects of the program that were useful and they had applied in real life. FINDINGS: There was overall satisfaction with the program, and content analysis identified three areas that were highlighted as particularly useful: "Finding alternative means: transport and service options," "Planning with more wisdom: thinking about driving cessation," and "Being with people: sharing experiences with peers." IMPLICATIONS: These findings indicate that program participants were satisfied with the current UQDRIVE intensive support group program and found both the psychosocial supports and practical strategies to be useful in managing driving cessation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.324
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.106 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207