ArticleCureus2024
Discriminant Validity of the Standardized On-Road Assessment for Drivers (SOAD) Among Stroke Patients in Japan.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOn-road tests are considered the gold standard for evaluating real-world driving skills. However, their reliability and validity remain inadequately established, particularly under varying legal and road conditions across countries.
aimThis study investigates the discriminant validity of the closed-course version of the Standardized On-Road Assessment for Drivers (SOAD) in Japan.
methodsThis study was conducted in five Japanese rehabilitation hospitals and affiliated driving schools. The participants consisted of 108 brain-injured individuals (mean age: 50.0 years) undergoing driving assessments. The inclusion criteria focused on physician-referred patients diagnosed with brain injuries. The SOAD closed-course test, consisting of 40 items, was compared with off-road cognitive assessments, including the Mini-Mental State Examination Japanese Version (MMSE-J), Trail Making Test Japanese Version (TMT-J), Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test, Stroke Drivers Screening Assessment Japanese version (J-SDSA), and Kohs Block Design Test. Spearman's correlation was used to evaluate discriminant validity, distinguishing driving-specific skills from cognitive functions.
resultsWeak to moderate correlations were found between SOAD and off-road tests, supporting the discriminant validity of SOAD. Among off-road tests, the J-SDSA dot time correlated most frequently with SOAD items, followed by MMSE-J and TMT-J. The highest correlation coefficient (-0.38) was observed between the J-SDSA dot error and a specific SOAD item.
conclusionThese results show that SOAD demonstrates strong discriminant validity as a closed-course on-road assessment tool for brain-injured individuals and measures unique aspects of driving skills not captured by cognitive tests.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.