MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399281517 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae054

A Systematic Review of Effective Interventions and Strategies to Support the Transition of Older Adults From Driving to Driving Retirement/Cessation

2024· review· en· W4399281517 on OpenAlexaff
Anne E. Dickerson, Tadhg Stapleton, Jamie Bloss, Isabelle Géinas, Priscilla Harries, Moon Ki Choi, Isabel Margot‐Cattin, Barbara Mazer, Ann‐Helen Patomella, Lizette Swanepoel, Lana van Niekerk, Carolyn Unsworth, Brenda Vrkljan

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionTransition (genetics)PsychologyMedicinePsychiatryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Objectives In most western countries, older adults depend on private cars for transportation and do not proactively plan for driving cessation. The objective of this review was to examine current research studies outlining effective interventions and strategies to assist older adults during their transition from driver to driving retirement or cessation. Research Design and Methods A search was completed across 9 databases using key words and MeSH terms for drivers, cessation of driving, and older adult drivers. Eligibility screening of 9,807 titles and abstracts, followed by a detailed screening of 206 papers, was completed using the Covidence platform. Twelve papers were selected for full-text screen and data extraction, comprising 3 papers with evidence-based intervention programs and 9 papers with evidence-informed strategies. Results Three papers met the research criteria of a controlled study for programs that support and facilitate driving cessation for older adults. Nine additional studies were exploratory or descriptive, which outlined strategies that could support older drivers, their families, and/or healthcare professionals during this transition. Driving retirement programs/toolkits are also presented. Discussion and Implications The driver retirement programs had promising results, but there were methodological weaknesses within the studies. Strategies extracted contributed to 6 themes: Reluctance and avoidance of the topic, multiple stakeholder involvement is important, taking proactive approach is critical, refocus the process away from assessment to proactive planning, collaborative approach to enable “ownership” of the decision is needed, and engage in planning alternative transportation should be the end result. Meeting the transportation needs of older adults will be essential to support aging in place, out-of-home mobility, and participation, particularly in developed countries where there is such a high dependency on private motor vehicles.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.009
Bibliometrics0.0130.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.399 · 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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207