These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Thirty-day self-reported risky driving behaviors of ADHD and non-ADHD drivers. Author: Rosenbloom T, Wultz B. Journal: Accid Anal Prev; 2011 Jan; 43(1):128-33. PubMed ID: 21094306. Abstract: The present study aims to compare differences in reported risky driving behaviors of drivers - males and females - having and not having Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), by using a checklist of driving behaviors based on the Driving Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ). Unlike the studies which employ the DBQ by asking the subjects to fill the questionnaire once, in this present study, the participants were asked to report their behaviors on a daily basis for 30 consequent days. The checklist included two factors of risky driving behavior: Violation and Faults. Thirty-eight drivers - 10 males and 9 females with ADHD, and 9 males and 10 females without ADHD (N-ADHD) as control groups - participated in the study. The results showed that the mean of the unsafe behaviors of ADHD was higher, i.e., less safe driving, compared to that of N-ADHD. However, a statistically significant effect was found only between male ADHD and male N-ADHD for the Faults. In order to check the effect of the length of the study, the 30 days duration of the research was divided into three consecutive periods. The reported driving habits of the female ADHD showed safer behaviors than those of the males. Unlike the findings of N-ADHD of both genders, which showed a tendency towards safer driving reports in the three periods, both genders of the ADHD showed higher rates of Faults, i.e., a decrease in safety driving reports, in the three periods. The findings suggest that ADHD drivers differ from the N-ADHD drivers in making driving mistakes, i.e., Faults, due to their lack of sustained attention, but not in making Violations. However, some of the results in the present study were not very strong. Possible explanations for this as well as methodological considerations are discussed, and further research is suggested.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]