MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143658815 · doi:10.1080/j148v23n02_08

Recommendations of the Canadian Consensus Conference on Driving Evaluation in Older Drivers

2005· article· en· W2143658815 on OpenAlex
Nicol Korner‐Bitensky, Isabelle Gélinas, Malcolm Man‐Son‐Hing, Shawn Marshall

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

VenuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In Geriatrics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaÉlisabeth Bruyère HospitalOttawa HospitalMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralPsychologyApplied psychologyGerontologyMedicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARYThis paper presents the results of the first Canadian Consensus Meeting focused on the structure and content of a comprehensive driving evaluation (CDE) for older individuals. The clientele of interest were individuals over 65 referred for a driving assessment primarily for cognitive reasons. The goals were: to develop recommendations on appropriate elderly clientele for referral; to identify important components of the pre- and on-road assessment; and, to delineate critical behaviors to be assessed on-road. Moderate-to-strong agreement was evident on a wide range of recommendations. These are presented along with assessment tools that have demonstrated psychometric value for driving evaluation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.307 · 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