From: Systematic screening for unsafe driving due to medical conditions: Still debatable
Criteria and corresponding indicators | Mentioned | Documented | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
 | n | % | n | % |
1. Are the consequences of the medical condition on road safety severe enough? | 25 | 70 | 14 | 39 |
   High prevalence of the medical condition (Is 1 ) | 15 | 42 | 3 | 11 |
   High proportion of individuals with medical condition who drive (Is 2 ) | 10 | 28 | 4 | 11 |
   High proportion of drivers with medical condition who become unsafe (Is 3 ) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
   Higher risk of collision of unsafe drivers due to medical condition (Is 4 ) | 21 | 58 | 6 | 17 |
   Frequency of potential self-regulation strategies (Fms) | 12 | 33 | 3 | 8 |
2. Is the potentially unsafe driving period defined and long enough? | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
   Definition of a potential unsafe driving period | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
   Length of the unsafe driving period | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
3. Is there a reliable and valid test? | 24 | 67 | 13 | 36 |
   Performance of diagnostic test to detect medical conditions (Ip 1 ) | 5 | 14 | 1 | 3 |
   Performance of diagnostic test to detect unsafe driving (Ip 2 ) | 18 | 50 | 12 | 33 |
   Prediction of collision risk (Ip 3 ) | 14 | 39 | 6 | 17 |
4. What should be the early intervention for drivers diagnosed unsafe? | 20 | 55 | 15 | 42 |
   Nature of intervention | 13 | 36 | 7 | 19 |
   Expected positive effects (Ipe) | 11 | 30 | 7 | 19 |
   Expected negative effects (Ine) | 12 | 33 | 2 | 5 |
5. Would the proposed screening programme result in more good than harm? | 19 | 53 | 2 | 5 |
6. Would the minimal resources required to implement the screening programme acceptable? | 8 | 22 | 2 | 5 |