Constructing the 32-item Fitness-to-Drive Screening Measure

Abstract

The Fitness-to-Drive Screening Measure^© (FTDS) enables proxies to identify at-risk older drivers via 54 driving-related items, but may be too lengthy for widespread uptake. We reduced the number of items in the FTDS and validated the shorter measure, using 200 caregiver responses. Exploratory factor analysis and classical test theory techniques were used to determine the most interpretable factor model and the minimum number of items to be used for predicting fitness to drive. The extent to which the shorter FTDS predicted the results of the 54-item FTDS was evaluated through correlational analysis. A three-factor model best represented the empirical data. Classical test theory techniques lead to the development of the 32-item FTDS. The 32-item FTDS was highly correlated (r = .99, p = .05) with the FTDS. The 32-item FTDS may provide raters with a faster and more efficient way to identify at-risk older drivers.

Keywords

measurement older adults driving screening

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blanchard

R. A.

Myers

A. M.

Porter

M. M.

(2010). Correspondence between self-reported and objective measures of driving exposure and patterns in older drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 523-529. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.09.018

Classen

Medhizadah

Alvarez

(2016). The Fitness-to-Drive Screening Measure©: Patterns and trends for Canadian users. The Open Journal of Occupational Therapy, 4, 41-15. doi.10.15453/2168-6408.1227

Classen

Velozo

C. A.

Winter

S. M.

Bédard

Wang

(2015). Psychometrics of the Fitness-to-Drive Screening Measure©. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 35, 42-52. doi.10.1177/1539449214561761

Classen

Winter

S. M.

Velozo

C. A.

Bédard

Lanford

D. N.

Brumback

. . . Lutz

B. J.

(2010). Item development and validity testing for a self- and proxy report: The Safe Driving Behavior Measure. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64, 296-305.

Cordazzo

S. T. D.

Scialfa

C. T.

Ross

R. J.

(2016). Modernization of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 87, 83-91. doi.10.1016/j.aap.2015.11.016

DeVellis

R. F.

(2006). Classical test theory. Medical Care, 44(11), 50-59. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41219505

Eby

D. W.

Molnar

L. J.

Shope

J. T.

Vivoda

J. M.

Fordyce

T. A.

(2003). Improving older driver knowledge and self-awareness through self-assessment: The driving decisions workbook. Journal of Safety Research, 34, 371-381. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2003.09.006

Family Caregiver Alliance. (2010). Fact sheet: Selected caregiver statistics. San Francisco, CA: Family Caregiver Alliance National Centre on Caregiving.

Federal Highway Administration. (2014). Highway finance data collection. U.S. National Department of National Transportation. Retrieved from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/pubs/hf/pl11028/chapter4.cfm

10.

Google. (n.d.). Google Analytics. Retrieved from www.google.com/analytics

11.

Hollander

M. J.

Liu

Chappell

N. L.

(2009). Who cares and how much: The imputed economic contribution to the Canadian healthcare system of middle-aged and older unpaid caregivers providing care to the elderly. Healthcare Quarterly, 12, 42-49.

12.

Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care. (2013). Benefits and risks of screening tests. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0072602/

13.

Levasseur

Audet

Gélinas

Bédard

Langlais

M.-E.

Therrien

F.-H.

. . . D’Amours

(2014). Development and validation of an awareness tool for safe and responsible driving (OSCAR). Journal of Scientific Research & Reports, 3, 2422-2433.

14.

Marotolli

Richardson

E. D.

(1998). Confidence in, and self rating of, driving ability among older drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 30, 331-336.

15.

McPeek

Nichols

A. L.

Classen

Breiner

(2011). Bias in older adults’ driving self-assessments: The role of personality. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14, 579-590. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2011.06.001

16.

Musselwhite

C. B. A.

Shergold

(2013). Examining the process of driving cessation in later life. European Journal of Ageing, 10, 89-100. doi.10.1007/s10433-012-0252-6

17.

National Alliance for Caregiving & AARP. (2015). Caregivers in the U.S. Retrieved from http://www.caregiving.org/caregiving2015/

18.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013). Traffic safety facts: Data 2013. U.S. National Department of National Transportation. Retrieved from https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812169

19.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2015). Traffic Safety facts: Data 2015. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Retrieved from https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812372

20.

Nicoletta

(2013). Driving characteristics of young and aging population. Statistics Canada. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/53f0007x/4224875-eng.pdf

21.

Portney

L. G.

Watkins

M. P.

(2009). Foundations of clinical practice: Applications to practice (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Health.

22.

R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/

23.

Tavakol

Dennick

(2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. doi: 10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd

24.

Thompson

(2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

25.

Transport Canada. (2014). Canadian Motor Vehicle Traffic Collision Statistics 2014. Retrieved from https://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/roadsafety/cmvtcs2014_eng.pdf

26.

Yong

A. G.

Pearce

(2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 9(2), 79-94.