MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096252701 · doi:10.11124/jbisrir-d-19-00420

Driving performance assessments for benzodiazepine receptor agonist–related impairment: a scoping review protocol

2020· review· en· W3096252701 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea Murphy, Sophie Peltekian, Melissa Helwig, Marilyn Macdonald, Ruth Martin‐Misener, Bandana Saini, Heather F. Neyedli, Chris Giacomantonio, David M. Gardner

Bibliographic record

VenueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)Capital District Health AuthorityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenzodiazepinePsycINFOMedicineMEDLINEAnxietyProtocol (science)InsomniaPsychiatryHealth careAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to identify, map, and characterize the evidence for assessments that measure driving performance in people taking benzodiazepine receptor agonists. INTRODUCTION: Benzodiazepines and Z-drugs are widely prescribed for the treatment of anxiety disorders and insomnia even though they are not recommended as an initial treatment for these indications. Benzodiazepine and Z-drug use is associated with an elevated risk of traffic accidents, and guidance documents instruct patients to consult with their health care providers for instructions on how to safely operate a motor vehicle while consuming these medications. However, little is known about the assessments that measure driving performance regarding the extent and length of impairment from the consumption of the individual benzodiazepines and Z-drugs. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible studies will include participants who are new, intermittent, or chronic users of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs. No exclusions will be applied regarding the health status of participants or whether their benzodiazepine and Z-drug use is for an approved indication as indicated by government agencies (eg, Health Canada) or practice guidelines. Studies that examine the consumption of a benzodiazepine and Z-drug in association with the operation of a motor vehicle (real or simulated) with direct or indirect objective or standard subjective measures or indicators of impairment while operating a motor vehicle will be considered. METHODS: Embase (Elsevier), MEDLINE (Ovid), and PsycINFO (EBSCO) will be searched as sources of published studies. Only studies published in English will be included, and there will be no limit on dates of publication. After screening the titles and abstracts of identified citations, two independent reviewers will retrieve potentially relevant full-text studies and extract data. Data will be presented in diagrammatic or tabular form accompanied by a narrative summary.

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)0.064
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0640.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.013
Bibliometrics0.0220.015
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.010

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.403 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBI Evidence SynthesisSame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207