Driving ability after conscious sedation: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Conscious sedation is widely used in medicine but may cause impairment of psychomotor and cognitive function that affect some aspects of a patient's life, such as car driving. This systematic review aims to summarize available evidence (direct or indirect) on driving ability after conscious sedation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive search was conducted including MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews through June 2022. Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Risk of bias was appraised as reported in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A narrative synthesis of 27 studies (962 subjects) was conducted, because the heterogeneity in terms of interventions and comparators, method and timing of assessment, and outcome measures precluded the feasibility of a meaningful meta-analysis. Conscious sedation was associated with different degrees of impairment in driving ability (real car driving, simulated driving, subjective perception), and psychomotor and cognitive functions (body sway, sleepiness, adaptive tracking, critical flicker fusion frequency, reaction/attention skills) at 0.5-10 hours after drug administration. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained from this review should be interpreted as a renewed recommendation to avoid driving after conscious sedation is administered. Yet it is not possible to determine when this ability is recovered, leaving this crucial and essential information to future, well-designed and reproducible research.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
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 | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".