MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127429234 · doi:10.1080/0164212x.2021.1877593

Driving Simulator, Virtual Reality, and On-Road Interventions for Driving-Related Anxiety: A Systematic Review

2021· review· en· W3127429234 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Knott, Sang Ho Kim, April Vander Veen, Erik Angeli, Eric J. Evans, W. E. Knight, April Ripley, Tuan Tran, Liliana Alvarez

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Therapy in Mental Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionAnxietyDriving simulatorDistressRehabilitationApplied psychologyPsychologyDriver rehabilitationClinical psychologySimulationComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Driving-related anxiety contributes to negative changes in driving habits, skills, and satisfaction. Driving rehabilitation interventions have the potential to address driving-related anxiety, however, the evidence is not yet critically appraised. Researchers conducted a systematic review on the impact of on-road, driving simulator or virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) driving rehabilitation interventions addressing driving-related anxiety. Searches in nine databases identified 1521 records, with 12 remaining for quality appraisal: two on-road, six driving simulator, and four on VRET. On-road interventions were low quality. Meanwhile, driving simulation and VRET interventions included high-quality evidence demonstrating significant reductions in psychological symptoms, subjective distress, and driving errors.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational Therapy in Mental HealthSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207