Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Drive”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
PubMed1995

[Legal requirements for medical findings in determining driving capacity in driving under the influence of drugs--discussion of establishing limit values for "absolute" incapacity].

Legally, alcohol and "other intoxicating substances" are given the same treatment (sections 315 c para. 1 letter a, 316 StGB). This implies that the findings of the German Public Health Office with regard to alcohol on the road should serve as methodical guidelines for medical findings when judging driver fitness after drug use. Therefore limits for "absolute" driver incapability after drug use can only decided on after special consideration of the outcome of attempts to drive. In addition, the basis of simultaneous results of the same rank of the biological-medical as well as the statistical research of the different psychotropic substances have to be taken into consideration. There is still a lack of proven results about the relation between dose, blood concentration and effect, which enabled the determination of limits. Therefore the emphasis of the medico-toxicological examination lies in the interpretation of the psycho-physical state of the driver at the time of being stopped and of the blood examination, as well as the blood-active substances-concentration with regard to the "relative" driver incapability.

Alcohol Drinking↗
PubMed1976

Escape learning in infant mice as a function of drive level and drive shifts during acquisition.

Separate groups of 9-day-old Swiss-Webster mice began straight-alley escape training at .1 or .4 mA. After 12 trials, half of the mice in each group were shifted to .4 or .1 mA, respectively, whereas the remaining half continued at their original level for an additional 12 trials. Twenty-four hours later, half of each of the 4 shock-level groups were retested at .1 mA, half at .4 mA. The results indicated that those groups which made a large number of competing responses during early trials and showed a gradual reduction over training trials (.1-.1 and .1-.4) emitted the fewest number during retest at either shock level. In contrast, those groups with either limited (.4-.1) or no (.4-.4) opportunity to decrease competing responses during training showed evidence of poor (.4-.1) and no (.4-.4) retention of learned inhibition of that response. Running speed was clearly a performance measure, as it only reflected existing shock levels during both training and retention trials.

Age Factors↗