MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075802085 · doi:10.1186/1471-2318-13-117

When it is time to hang up the keys: the driving and dementia toolkit – for persons with dementia (PWD) and caregivers – a practical resource

2013· letter· en· W2075802085 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Byszewski, Faranek Aminzadeh, Kelly Robinson, Frank Molnar, William Dalziel, Malcolm Man Son Hing, Lynn Hunt, Shawn Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
FundersAlzheimer Society
KeywordsDementiaHangMedicineRehabilitationResource (disambiguation)Physical medicine and rehabilitationGerontologyPhysical therapyComputer networkComputer scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of this project was to develop a toolkit to assist persons with dementia (PWD) and their caregivers, in planning for retirement from driving. The information gathered was used to develop a tool that can assist reflection about, and make sound decisions in this challenging area of the dementia journey. The purpose is to keep safe drivers on the road and to prepare those who are moving towards being at risk of being involved in crashes, to eventually stop driving when they are unsafe.The toolkit was prepared to address the concerns of both the PWD as well as the caregivers. Strategies and solutions are presented for both the PWD and the caregivers. A grief insert was also developed that can assist caregivers in supporting the PWD in the grief process that can accompany losing one's driving privileges.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeriatricsSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207