Journal
ACCIDENT ANALYSIS AND PREVENTION
Volume 59, Issue -, Pages 537-547Publisher
PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.06.037
Keywords
Driving safety; Multiple object tracking; Visual attention
Categories
Funding
- NCRR NIH HHS [1 UL1 RR 025758-02, UL1 RR025758] Funding Source: Medline
- NEI NIH HHS [R00 EY018680] Funding Source: Medline
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Objectives: To conduct a pilot study to evaluate the predictive value of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (MoCA) and a brief test of multiple object tracking (MOT) relative to other tests of cognition and attention in identifying at-risk older drivers, and to determine which combination of tests provided the best overall prediction. Methods: Forty-seven currently licensed drivers (58-95 years), primarily from a clinical driving evaluation program, participated. Their performance was measured on: (1) a screening test battery, comprising MoCA, MOT, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Trail-Making Test, visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and Useful Field of View (UFOV) and (2) a standardized road test. Results: Eighteen participants were rated at-risk on the road test. UFOV subtest 2 was the best single predictor with an area under the curve (AUC) of .84. Neither MoCA nor MOT was a better predictor of the at-risk outcome than either MMSE or UFOV, respectively. The best four-test combination (MMSE, UFOV subtest 2, visual acuity and contrast sensitivity) was able to identify at-risk drivers with 95% specificity and 80% sensitivity (.91 AUC). Conclusions: Although the best four-test combination was much better than a single test in identifying at-risk drivers, there is still much work to do in this field to establish test batteries that have both high sensitivity and specificity. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available