MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102533502 · doi:10.5014/ajot.64.2.259

Supporting Safe Driving With Arthritis: Developing a Driving Toolkit for Clinical Practice and Consumer Use

2010· article· en· W2102533502 on OpenAlexafffund
Brenda Vrkljan, Ann Cranney, Julia Worswick, Siobhan O’Donnell, Linda Li, Isabelle Gélinas, Anna Byszewski, Malcolm Man‐Son‐Hing, Shawn Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationPublic Health Agency of CanadaArthritis SocietyMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFocus groupMedicineCoding (social sciences)Resource (disambiguation)ArthritisPopulationBusinessComputer scienceMarketingSociologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted a series of focus groups to explore the information needs of clinicians and consumers related to arthritis and driving. An open coding analysis identified common themes across both consumer and clinician-based focus groups that underscored the importance of addressing driving-related concerns and the challenges associated with assessing safety. The results revealed that although driving is critical for maintaining independence and community mobility, drivers with arthritis experience several problems that can affect safe operation of a motor vehicle. Findings from this study are part of a broader research initiative that will inform the development of the Arthritis and Driving toolkit. This toolkit outlines strategies to support safe mobility for people with arthritis and will be an important resource in the coming years given the aging population.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.391 · 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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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