↓ Skip to main content

Development of a curriculum and roadside screening tool for Law enforcement identification of medical impairment in aging drivers

Overview of attention for article published in Injury Epidemiology, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development of a curriculum and roadside screening tool for Law enforcement identification of medical impairment in aging drivers
Published in
Injury Epidemiology, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40621-016-0078-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linda L. Hill, Jill Rybar, James Stowe, Jana Jahns

Abstract

An estimated one in five drivers will be over 65 by 2030. Compared with their younger counterparts, older adults are more likely to experience health and functional impairments, including cognitive dysfunction, which may interfere with their ability to drive safely. Law enforcement officers, as part of the public safety community, need help in developing the necessary skills to identify and manage these medically affected drivers. To address this need, in partnership with the California Highway Patrol (CHP), Training, Research and Education for Driving Safety (TREDS) at the University of California, San Diego, developed a certified two-hour training curriculum. To complement the training, the TREDS team also developed a roadside screening tool to assess for disorientation related to person, place, and time. The tool was developed, validated with a sample of persons with dementia compared to cognitively normal controls, and deployed in the training. A total of 2,018 police officers received instruction at 103 training sessions. At baseline, prior to training, only 26 % of officers had reported drivers to the Department of Motor Vehicles in the previous 6 months. After training, 96 % stated they were likely to use their standard reporting forms, and 90 % reported they were likely to use the roadside screening tool. The certified training and tool were well received and resulted in changes to knowledge, attitudes, and intention to incorporate their new knowledge and tools into roadside screening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 18%
Social Sciences 4 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Computer Science 2 6%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 12 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2016.
All research outputs
#6,226,235
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Injury Epidemiology
#177
of 324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,203
of 298,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Injury Epidemiology
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.