Cargando…
Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
BACKGROUND: Fitness-to-drive guidelines recommend employing the Trail Making B Test (a.k.a. Trails B), but do not provide guidance regarding cut-off scores. There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal cut-off score on the Trails B test. The objective of this study was to address this controversy b...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Canadian Geriatrics Society
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23983828 http://dx.doi.org/10.5770/cgj.16.76 |
_version_ | 1782281794618392576 |
---|---|
author | Roy, Mononita Molnar, Frank |
author_facet | Roy, Mononita Molnar, Frank |
author_sort | Roy, Mononita |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Fitness-to-drive guidelines recommend employing the Trail Making B Test (a.k.a. Trails B), but do not provide guidance regarding cut-off scores. There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal cut-off score on the Trails B test. The objective of this study was to address this controversy by systematically reviewing the evidence for specific Trails B cut-off scores (e.g., cut-offs in both time to completion and number of errors) with respect to fitness-to-drive. METHODS: Systematic review of all prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, case-control, correlation, and cross-sectional studies reporting the ability of the Trails B to predict driving safety that were published in English-language, peer-reviewed journals. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were reviewed. None of the articles justified sample sizes via formal calculations. Cut-off scores reported based on research include: 90 seconds, 133 seconds, 147 seconds, 180 seconds, and < 3 errors. CONCLUSIONS: There is support for the previously published Trails B cut-offs of 3 minutes or 3 errors (the ‘3 or 3 rule’). Major methodological limitations of this body of research were uncovered including (1) lack of justification of sample size leaving studies open to Type II error (i.e., false negative findings), and (2) excessive focus on associations rather than clinically useful cut-off scores. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3753211 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Canadian Geriatrics Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37532112013-08-27 Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive Roy, Mononita Molnar, Frank Can Geriatr J Systemic Reviews/Meta-Analysis BACKGROUND: Fitness-to-drive guidelines recommend employing the Trail Making B Test (a.k.a. Trails B), but do not provide guidance regarding cut-off scores. There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal cut-off score on the Trails B test. The objective of this study was to address this controversy by systematically reviewing the evidence for specific Trails B cut-off scores (e.g., cut-offs in both time to completion and number of errors) with respect to fitness-to-drive. METHODS: Systematic review of all prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, case-control, correlation, and cross-sectional studies reporting the ability of the Trails B to predict driving safety that were published in English-language, peer-reviewed journals. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were reviewed. None of the articles justified sample sizes via formal calculations. Cut-off scores reported based on research include: 90 seconds, 133 seconds, 147 seconds, 180 seconds, and < 3 errors. CONCLUSIONS: There is support for the previously published Trails B cut-offs of 3 minutes or 3 errors (the ‘3 or 3 rule’). Major methodological limitations of this body of research were uncovered including (1) lack of justification of sample size leaving studies open to Type II error (i.e., false negative findings), and (2) excessive focus on associations rather than clinically useful cut-off scores. Canadian Geriatrics Society 2013-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3753211/ /pubmed/23983828 http://dx.doi.org/10.5770/cgj.16.76 Text en © 2013 Author(s). Published by the Canadian Geriatrics Society. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No-Derivative license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ca/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use and distribution, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Systemic Reviews/Meta-Analysis Roy, Mononita Molnar, Frank Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive |
title | Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive |
title_full | Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive |
title_fullStr | Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive |
title_short | Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive |
title_sort | systematic review of the evidence for trails b cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive |
topic | Systemic Reviews/Meta-Analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23983828 http://dx.doi.org/10.5770/cgj.16.76 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT roymononita systematicreviewoftheevidencefortrailsbcutoffscoresinassessingfitnesstodrive AT molnarfrank systematicreviewoftheevidencefortrailsbcutoffscoresinassessingfitnesstodrive |