Driving Intervention for Returning Combat Veterans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased crash incidence following deployment and veterans' reports of driving difficulty spurred traffic safety research for this population. We conducted an interim analysis on the efficacy of a simulator-based occupational therapy driving intervention (OT-DI) compared with traffic safety education (TSE) in a randomized controlled trial. During baseline and post-testing, OT-Driver Rehabilitation Specialists and one OT-Certified Driver Rehabilitation Specialist measured driving performance errors on a DriveSafety CDS-250 high-fidelity simulator. The intervention group ( n = 13) received three OT-DI sessions addressing driving errors and visual-search retraining. The control group ( n = 13) received three TSE sessions addressing personal factors and defensive driving. Based on Wilcoxon rank-sum analysis, the OT-DI group's errors were significantly reduced when comparing baseline with Post-Test 1 ( p < .0001) and comparing the OT-DI group with the TSE group at Post-Test 1 ( p = .01). These findings provide support for the efficacy of the OT-DI and set the stage for a future effectiveness study.
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 | 0.002 | 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".