MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625817375 · doi:10.1161/str.47.suppl_1.wp151

Abstract WP151: Increased Risky Driving in Acute Compared to Chronic Ischemic Stroke Drivers

2016· article· en· W2625817375 on OpenAlexaff
Megan A. Hird, K Veselý, Gustavo Saposnik, R. Loch Macdonald, Tom A. Schweizer

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Chronic strokeAcute strokeDriving simulatorPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyInternal medicineRehabilitationTissue plasminogen activatorSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Guidelines recommend that patients refrain from driving in the acute phase of stroke. Patients are permitted to resume driving if no significant motor, cognitive, or perceptual deficits are present. This study investigated the driving performance of patients with mild ischemic stroke in the acute and chronic stages of recovery. It was hypothesized that patients with acute stroke would commit more risky driving errors (e.g. collisions, lane deviations) and that patients with chronic stroke would perform comparably to healthy matched controls. Methods: Driving simulator technology (STISIM) was used to compare the driving performance of 11 patients with acute mild ischemic stroke (NIHSS<5, <1 month post-stroke), 11 patients with chronic mild ischemic stroke (NIHSS<5 at discharge, >3 months post-stroke), and 11 healthy age- and education-matched controls. Participants completed a city-driving task and a car following task, which requires sustained attention and error monitoring. Results: Patients with acute stroke committed over three times as many risky driving errors compared to healthy controls during the city-driving task (6.2 vs. 1.7, p<0.01). Acute stroke patients made more errors (8.7 vs. 2.0, p<0.05) and had difficulty maintaining proper lane position (p<0.05) compared to controls during the car following task. Patients with chronic stroke committed fewer errors than acute stroke patients during the car following task (3.0 vs. 8.7, p<0.05) and tended to commit fewer risky driving errors during the city-driving task (2.7 vs. 6.2, p=0.076). Patients with chronic stroke performed comparably to controls during the driving tasks. Conclusions: Results suggest that patients with acute mild ischemic stroke may demonstrate impaired driving ability and that performance may improve in the chronic phase of recovery. The results reinforce the importance of refraining from driving in the acute phase of stroke and suggest that patients with good functional and cognitive recovery may be safe to resume driving in the chronic phase of injury. A large-scale longitudinal study is required to determine the optimal time for patients to resume driving after stroke.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207