Care Partner Perspectives on Driving Cessation in Dementia in the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Driving cessation is an expected eventuality in dementia care that has significant consequences for people with dementia (PWD) and care partners (CPs) alike. In collaboration with the Alzheimer Society of Saskatchewan, we explored CPs' experiences of the driving cessation process. Using an online survey including closed- and open-ended questions, we collected data from 44 CPs of current drivers and from 207 CPs of former drivers. Our quantitative and qualitative analyses identified three key findings. First, although CPs want and expect regulatory bodies and medical practitioners to be involved in the driving cessation process, their involvement is often less than anticipated. Second, driving cessation poses unique challenges to CPs in rural areas given the centrality of driving in smaller communities and limited transportation options to access services. Finally, CPs of former drivers found several positive benefits from the driving cessation process that were unanticipated. In conclusion, these three areas represent opportunities for education, support, and resources for PWD, CPs, and professionals through the driving cessation process.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".