Independence, loss, and social identity: Perspectives on driving cessation and dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study on driving cessation was to explore the process of coping, decision-making and adaptation through this major life transition. We sought to examine understandings of the emotional responses of drivers and ex-drivers with dementia from the perspective of healthcare providers and family caregivers of persons with dementia. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with several key informant groups: healthcare providers who work with patients with dementia and their families ( N = 10), representatives from organizations that provide services and support for persons with dementia ( N = 6), and family caregivers of drivers and former drivers with dementia ( N = 13). Data analysis involved inductive analytic techniques to generate descriptive and analytic themes from the data. The main themes from the analysis involve the: (1) Loss of independence and disruption to identity connected to emotional responses to driving cessation; (2) Experience of driving cessation as one loss within a series of losses related to dementia; (3) Importance of addressing emotional and identity-related effects in supportive responses to driving cessation; and (4) Support for maintained and adapted roles as a strategy to provide meaning and purpose in the context of driving cessation. Driving cessation can represent a significant disruption to identity, and is closely linked to losses, such as independence, within people’s broader experiences of grief and loss associated with dementia. The findings suggest the need for supportive responses that address unique emotion and identity-related aspects of driving cessation for people with dementia and their family caregivers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".