International Comparison of Older Drivers and Non-Drivers for Activity Access and Quality of Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Driving is crucial for many people to age in place, as it is the most convenient option, and somtimes the only option for personal transport. This international, cross-sectional, cohort study of older adults (n=246) compared drivers’ and non-drivers’ quality of life and levels of community participation. Following ethical approval, data were collected across seven countries. The EQ-5D-5L was used to measure health related quality of life and a modified version of the Participation in Activities and Places Outside the Home (ACT-OUT) was used to measure community participation (T-ACT-OUT). Drivers accessed more out-of-home activities than non-drivers, suggesting higher community participation among this group. Health related quality of life was generally high among all participants, but slightly higher for drivers (U=3186, z=-2.78, p=.005, r=0.18). These findings resonate with recent evidence, which suggests supporting older drivers to continue to drive for as long as possible provides critical access to their communities (O’Neill et al., 2019). Part of a symposium sponsored by Transportation and Aging Interest Group.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".