4.2 Article

Self-Evaluation of Driving Simulator Performance After Stroke

期刊

TOPICS IN STROKE REHABILITATION
卷 18, 期 5, 页码 549-561

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1310/tsr1805-549

关键词

awareness of deficits; driving; driving simulator; neuropsychological assessment; stroke

资金

  1. US Department of Education, National Institute on Disability Research and Rehabilitation [H133G050134]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose: Despite the potential dangers associated with premature return to driving after stroke, very little research has examined the relationship between impaired self-awareness (ISA) and driving. This study examined self-awareness of driving simulator and neuropsychological performance among stroke patients, comparing them with healthy control participants. Methods: Thirty stroke survivors and 30 controls each were asked for prediction and postdiction ratings of their performance on various driving simulator and neuropsychological tasks. Self-estimates versus actual performance discrepancy scores were calculated for various simulator and neuropsychological measures by converting scores to a shared metric. Results: Across all measures, the stroke survivors greatly overestimated their performance in comparison with the accuracy of self-evaluations among the controls, thus suggesting ISA. This pattern of overestimating was observed on both novel (neuropsychological) and familiar (driving) tasks. However, there was some evidence to suggest that stroke survivors can benefit from feedback, as seen by increased accuracy in postdiction versus prediction self-evaluation scores. Both stroke survivors and controls also showed a greater shift toward accurate self-estimation on postdiction of driving performance than on postdiction of neuropsychological test performance. Conclusion: Although the temporal stability of the shift in awareness is not known, these results support the use of driving simulators as a useful and safe method of assessing and potentially improving stroke survivors' ISA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据