Cited by 23Traffic and Road SafetyRisk and Safety AnalysisRisk Perception and Management

Should persons with diabetes be licensed to drive trucks?—Risk management

Lave, Lester B., Songer, Thomas J., LaPorte, Ronald E.·1993·Risk Analysis

Abstract

How should a regulatory agency interpret a risk analysis that concludes there is a small increase in risk? The agency must decide on behalf of society whether the increased risk is large enough to justify banning the risky activity or taking some other step to lessen the risks. In a companion paper (Songer et al.), we conclude that licensing insulin using persons to drive commercial motor vehicles in interstate commerce would result in 42 additional crashes each year. Here we address risk management issues by interpreting the number of additional crashes and the relative risks of the prospective handicapped drivers. Are the number of additional crashes (42) significant? Is the increase in the annual crash risk (from 0.00785 to 0.032 for non-insulin dependent and 0.048 for insulin dependent persons) significant? Are the relative risks significant for all insulin using drivers (4.7)? For drivers with a history of severe hypoglycemic reactions (19.8)? How should society tradeoff risk increases for increases in opportunity for these handicapped persons? We review other social decisions concerning highway safety: Accepting the increasing risks of letting 16 year olds drive, allowing extremely light cars, allowing some unsafe highways, and allowing extremely unsafe driving conditions at some times of day. We conclude that the additional risks from insulin using persons are well within the current accepted range of risks.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01084.x

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lave, L. B., Songer, T. J., & LaPorte, R. E.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
Risk Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-06
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
327-334
ISSN
  • 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-6924
OpenAlex
W2005771384
Cited by
23
References
11
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
6.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Risk Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Traffic and Road Safety
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Risk and Safety Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
Keywords
diabetes mellitus, commercial truck drivers, driver licensing, type 1 diabetes, crash risk, risk management, regulatory decision-making, highway safety, hypoglycemia, risk trade-offs, young drivers, light-duty vehicles
MeSH terms
Accidents, Traffic, Adolescent, Adult, Automobile Driving, Costs and Cost Analysis, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Humans, Licensure, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Management, United States

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