Rapid review of experimental studies on alcohol and cannabis use and simulated driving behaviour: What can we learn about study methods?

IF 9.9 1区 工程技术 Q1 TRANSPORTATION
Transport Reviews Pub Date : 2026-01-02 Epub Date: 2025-09-23 DOI:10.1080/01441647.2025.2561613
Lisa Buckley , Taren Mieran , Kerry A. Armstrong
{"title":"Rapid review of experimental studies on alcohol and cannabis use and simulated driving behaviour: What can we learn about study methods?","authors":"Lisa Buckley ,&nbsp;Taren Mieran ,&nbsp;Kerry A. Armstrong","doi":"10.1080/01441647.2025.2561613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Driving under the influence of alcohol and cannabis, either alone or in combination, remains a significant public health concern due to the increased risk of fatal or serious injury crashes. Experimental studies using driving simulators provide a safe and controlled method for examining the effects of these substances on driving performance. However, limited research has critically analysed commonly used methodologies, and variations across studies complicate comparisons and the interpretation of findings. This rapid review synthesises methodological considerations in experimental simulator studies published in the past five years, focusing on research design, participant selection, substance administration, simulated driving hardware, and outcome measures. Through systematic database searches, we identified 3,698 publications that assessed the effects of alcohol, cannabis, or their combination on simulated driving. Following full-text review, a total of 54 studies were deemed eligible for narrative synthesis. High quality research designs (within-subject crossover designs) were feasible but were not always used. Cannabis administration methods varied markedly across studies relative to alcohol and had important implications for factors such as administration timing. For alcohol, standardised and evidence-based protocols for placebo preparation were lacking. Driving simulators differed in fidelity, ranging from full-cab motion-based setups to PC-based systems with varying fields of view. The most commonly assessed driving performance measures were standard deviation of lane position (SDLP) and speed control. Additionally, few studies examined the combined effects of alcohol and cannabis, or accounted for factors such as cross-tolerance, individual differences in substance use history, or simulator sickness. This review highlights the need for standardisation in experimental simulator research on substance-impaired driving. Establishing methodological guidelines could improve the reliability and generalisability of findings, thereby improving the overall quality of experimental research in this area.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48197,"journal":{"name":"Transport Reviews","volume":"46 1","pages":"Pages 151-172"},"PeriodicalIF":9.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transport Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S014416472500039X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Driving under the influence of alcohol and cannabis, either alone or in combination, remains a significant public health concern due to the increased risk of fatal or serious injury crashes. Experimental studies using driving simulators provide a safe and controlled method for examining the effects of these substances on driving performance. However, limited research has critically analysed commonly used methodologies, and variations across studies complicate comparisons and the interpretation of findings. This rapid review synthesises methodological considerations in experimental simulator studies published in the past five years, focusing on research design, participant selection, substance administration, simulated driving hardware, and outcome measures. Through systematic database searches, we identified 3,698 publications that assessed the effects of alcohol, cannabis, or their combination on simulated driving. Following full-text review, a total of 54 studies were deemed eligible for narrative synthesis. High quality research designs (within-subject crossover designs) were feasible but were not always used. Cannabis administration methods varied markedly across studies relative to alcohol and had important implications for factors such as administration timing. For alcohol, standardised and evidence-based protocols for placebo preparation were lacking. Driving simulators differed in fidelity, ranging from full-cab motion-based setups to PC-based systems with varying fields of view. The most commonly assessed driving performance measures were standard deviation of lane position (SDLP) and speed control. Additionally, few studies examined the combined effects of alcohol and cannabis, or accounted for factors such as cross-tolerance, individual differences in substance use history, or simulator sickness. This review highlights the need for standardisation in experimental simulator research on substance-impaired driving. Establishing methodological guidelines could improve the reliability and generalisability of findings, thereby improving the overall quality of experimental research in this area.
快速回顾关于酒精和大麻使用和模拟驾驶行为的实验研究:我们可以从研究方法中学到什么?
在酒精和大麻的影响下驾驶,无论是单独驾驶还是混合驾驶,仍然是一个重大的公共卫生问题,因为致命或严重伤害事故的风险增加。使用驾驶模拟器的实验研究为检查这些物质对驾驶性能的影响提供了一种安全、可控的方法。然而,有限的研究已经批判性地分析了常用的方法,并且研究之间的差异使比较和解释结果复杂化。这篇快速综述综合了过去五年发表的实验模拟器研究的方法学考虑,重点是研究设计、参与者选择、物质管理、模拟驾驶硬件和结果测量。通过系统的数据库搜索,我们确定了3,698份评估酒精、大麻或两者组合对模拟驾驶影响的出版物。在全文审查后,共有54项研究被认为符合叙事综合的条件。高质量的研究设计(受试者内交叉设计)是可行的,但并不总是使用。与酒精相关的大麻给药方法在不同研究中有显著差异,对给药时间等因素有重要影响。对于酒精,缺乏标准化和基于证据的安慰剂制备方案。驾驶模拟器的保真度不同,从基于全驾驶室运动的设置到基于pc的不同视场的系统。最常评估的驾驶性能指标是车道位置标准差(SDLP)和速度控制。此外,很少有研究调查酒精和大麻的综合影响,或考虑交叉耐受性、物质使用史的个体差异或模拟病等因素。这篇综述强调了对物质损伤驾驶的实验模拟器研究进行标准化的必要性。建立方法学指南可以提高研究结果的可靠性和普遍性,从而提高该领域实验研究的整体质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transport Reviews
Transport Reviews TRANSPORTATION-
CiteScore
17.70
自引率
1.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Transport Reviews is an international journal that comprehensively covers all aspects of transportation. It offers authoritative and current research-based reviews on transportation-related topics, catering to a knowledgeable audience while also being accessible to a wide readership. Encouraging submissions from diverse disciplinary perspectives such as economics and engineering, as well as various subject areas like social issues and the environment, Transport Reviews welcomes contributions employing different methodological approaches, including modeling, qualitative methods, or mixed-methods. The reviews typically introduce new methodologies, analyses, innovative viewpoints, and original data, although they are not limited to research-based content.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书