Psychiatric Risk Factors for Motor Vehicle Fatalities in Young Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle accident (MVA) fatalities are an important cause of death in young men. Psychiatric disorders have been shown to be risk factors for MVA, but only a few studies have investigated MVA fatalities. METHOD: A case-control study was carried out comparing 61 young male MVA fatalities in which the subject was the driver with an equal number of living male subjects matched for age (case by case with no more than 1 year's difference between case subjects and control subjects) with the accident group. We assessed both groups, using structured interviews and psychological autopsies. RESULTS: Our results suggest that cluster B personality disorders (borderline and [or] antisocial) (OR 3.54; 95%CI, 1.38 to 16.01) and substance use disorders in the last 6 months (OR 4.33; 95%CI, 1.42 to 9.25) increased the risk of dying in MVAs. In addition, we observed an age effect, where differences in cluster B personality disorders and substance use disorders in the last 6 months were only significantly more prevalent in case subjects aged 26 years or over, compared with control subjects of the same age. Drivers under age 25 years appeared to be comparable with control subjects on all measures of psychopathology. Finally, this interaction between cluster B personality disorders and age over 26 years was the only significant predictor of car fatalities (adjusted OR 16.25; 95%CI, 1.67 to 158.10). CONCLUSION: Borderline and antisocial personality disorders in which impulsive-aggressive behaviours play a central role and substance use disorders appear to be risk factors for young male deaths in MVAs. Interestingly, this effect seems to be specific to MVA case subjects aged 26 years or over.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".