MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126753101 · doi:10.2147/rmhp.s280249

The Effects of Cognitive and Visual Functions of Korean Elderly Taxi Drivers on Safe Driving Behavior

2021· article· en· W3126753101 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yang Yeong-Ae, Hye-Jin Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Management and Healthcare Policy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInje University
KeywordsCognitionPerceptionVisual perceptionPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: In this study, we investigated the effect of visual and cognitive functions of elderly taxi drivers on safe driving behavior. We aimed to identify factors that interfere with safe driving in an aging Korean society in elderly taxi drivers. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: A total of 203 elderly taxi drivers, aged >65, working at 3 companies in a single city were assessed over 4 weeks from December 1 to December 30, 2017, using the Motor-Free Visual Perception Test, Korean Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Korean Safe Driving Behavior Measure. To examine the effects of cognitive and visual functions on driving behavior, we performed a stepwise multiple linear regression analysis (p<0.05). RESULTS: All 4 subdomains of safe driving behaviors were significantly correlated with the cognitive subdomains of attention and abstraction and the visual perception subdomains of visual closure 1 and figure-ground. CONCLUSION: More systematic assessments of the relationship between driving behavior and cognitive and visual function in elderly individuals are needed.

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)0.002
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk Management and Healthcare PolicySame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207