MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093193104 · doi:10.1080/15389580490465418

Alcohol Ignition Interlock Programs

2004· article· en· W2093193104 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTraffic Injury Prevention · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsTraffic Injury Research Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterlockLegislationLegislaturePoison controlCertificationOccupational safety and healthTest (biology)EngineeringMedicineBusinessComputer securityEnvironmental healthComputer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The alcohol ignition interlock is an in-vehicle DWI control device that prevents a car from starting until the operator provides a breath alcohol concentration (BAC) test below a set level, usually .02% (20 mg/dl) to .04% (40 mg/dl). The first interlock program was begun as a pilot test in California 18 years ago; today all but a few US states, and Canadian provinces have interlock enabling legislation. Sweden has recently implemented a nationwide interlock program. Other nations of the European Union and as well as several Australian states are testing it on a small scale or through pilot research. This article describes the interlock device and reviews the development and current status of interlock programs including their public safety benefit and the public practice impediments to more widespread adoption of these DWI control devices. Included in this review are (1) a discussion of the technological breakthroughs and certification standards that gave rise to the design features of equipment that is in widespread use today; (2) a commentary on the growing level of adoption of interlocks by governments despite the judicial and legislative practices that prevent more widespread use of them; (3) a brief overview of the extant literature documenting a high degree of interlock efficacy while installed, and the rapid loss of their preventative effect on repeat DWI once they are removed from the vehicles; (4) a discussion of the representativeness of subjects in the current research studies; (5) a discussion of research innovations, including motivational intervention efforts that may extend the controlling effect of the interlock, and data mining research that has uncovered ways to use the stored interlock data record of BAC tests in order to predict high risk drivers; and (6) a discussion of communication barriers and conceptual rigidities that may be preventing the alcohol ignition interlock from taking a more prominent role in the arsenal of tools used to control DWI. Whether interlock programs can help public policymakers achieve their expressed goals of substantially reducing the level of impaired driving will remain uncertain until procedural barriers and intransigent judiciary practices can be overcome that provide for more systematic routine use of interlock programs. Despite strong effectiveness evidence in all studies to date, the real potential of this technology to reduce the road toll cannot be estimated until they are more widely adopted.

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.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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