The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cumulative Meta-analysis of the Relationship Between Useful Field of View and Driving Performance in Older Adults: Current and Future Implications
Abstract
PURPOSE: Driving is a complex behavior that requires the utilization of a wide range of individual abilities. Identifying assessments that not only capture individual differences, but also are related to older adults' driving performance would be beneficial. This investigation examines the relationship between the Useful Field of View (UFOV) assessment and objective measures of retrospective or concurrent driving performance, including state-recorded accidents, on-road driving, and driving simulator performance. METHOD: The PubMed and PsycINFO databases were searched to retrieve eight studies that reported bivariate relationships between UFOV and these objective driving measures. Cumulative meta-analysis techniques were used to combine the effect sizes in an attempt to determine whether the strength of the relationship was stable across studies and to assess whether a sufficient number of studies have been conducted to validate the relationship between UFOV and driving performance. RESULTS: A within-group homogeneity of effect sizes test revealed that the samples could be thought of as being drawn from the same population, Q [7] = 11.29, p (one-tailed) = 0.13. Therefore, the effect sizes of eight studies were combined for the present cumulative meta-analysis. The weighted mean effect size across the studies revealed a large effect (Cohen's d = 0.945), with poorer UFOV performance associated with negative driving outcomes. This relationship was robust across multiple indices of driving performance and several research laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: This convergence of evidence across numerous studies using different methodologies confirms the importance of the UFOV assessment as a valid and reliable index of driving performance and safety. Recent prospective studies have confirmed a relationship between UFOV performance and future crashes, further supporting the use of this instrument as a potential screening measure for at-risk older drivers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis
Wasserman, S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,326
Reading and understanding multivariate statistics
Grimm, L. G., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995) · Cited by 2,234
Effects of Cognitive Training Interventions With Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Ball, K., Berch, D. B., Helmers, K. F., Jobe, J. B., Leveck, M. D., Marsiske, M., Morris, J. N., Rebok, G. W., Smith, D. M., Tennstedt, S. L., et al. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.18.2271 · Cited by 2,049
Self-citationVisual Processing Impairment and Risk of Motor Vehicle Crash Among Older Adults
Owsley, C. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.14.1083 · Cited by 858
Visual attention problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes in older drivers.
Ball, K., Owsley, C. J., Sloane, M. E., Roenker, D. L., & Bruni, J. R. (1993) · PubMed · Cited by 776
Self-citationAge and visual search: expanding the useful field of view
Ball, K. K., Beard, B. L., Roenker, D. L., Miller, R. L., & Griggs, D. S. (1988) · Journal of the Optical Society of America A · doi:10.1364/josaa.5.002210 · Cited by 601
Self-citationVisual/cognitive correlates of vehicle accidents in older drivers.
Owsley, C., Ball, K., Sloane, M. E., & Roenker, D. L. (1991) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037//0882-7974.6.3.403 · Cited by 558
Self-citation(1993) · PubMed · Cited by 472
Speed-of-Processing and Driving Simulator Training Result in Improved Driving Performance
Roenker, D. L., Cissell, G. M., Ball, K. K., Wadley, V. G., & Edwards, J. D. (2003) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/hfes.45.2.218.27241 · Cited by 469
Self-citationCooper, H. M. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.37.1.131 · Cited by 412
Cited by
Do “brain-training” programs work?
Simons, D. J., Boot, W. R., Charness, N., Gathercole, S. E., Chabris, C. F., Hambrick, D. Z., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (2016) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100616661983 · Cited by 1,183
Owsley, C., & McGwin, G. (2010) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/j.visres.2010.05.021 · Cited by 451
The useful field of view test: Normative data for older adults
EDWARDS, J., ROSS, L., WADLEY, V, CLAY, O., CROWE, M., ROENKER, D., & BALL, K. (2006) · Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology · doi:10.1016/j.acn.2006.03.001 · Cited by 231
Self-citationKotler, S., Mannino, M., Kelso, S., & Huskey, R. (2022) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104956 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- CLAY, O. J., WADLEY, V. G., EDWARDS, J. D., ROTH, D. L., ROENKER, D. L., & BALL, K. K.
- Venue
- Optometry and Vision Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-08
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 724-731
- ISSN
- 1040-5488 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2119450676
- Cited by
- 313
- References
- 33
- FWCI
- 28.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cumulative Meta-analysis of the Relationship Between Useful Field of View and Driving Performance in Older Adults: Current and Future Implications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.opx.0000175009.08626.65
- The paper
- CLAY, O. J., WADLEY, V. G., EDWARDS, J. D., ROTH, D. L., ROENKER, D. L., & BALL, K. K. (2005). Cumulative Meta-analysis of the Relationship Between Useful Field of View and Driving Performance in Older Adults: Current and Future Implications. Optometry and Vision Science. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.opx.0000175009.08626.65
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.