Framework for the evaluation of a holistic fitness-to-drive system for commercial drivers in the PANACEA project
DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1005227
archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified
Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)
Summary
This paper addresses the need for a standardized evaluation methodology for the PANACEA project, an EU-funded initiative developing a holistic "Commercial Health Toolkit" (CHT) to assess the fitness-to-drive of commercial drivers. Commercial drivers frequently face impairments such as fatigue, stress, and substance use, necessitating a system that monitors physical, cognitive, and psychological states before, during, and after shifts. The PANACEA system includes cloud-based countermeasures and coaching tools targeting drivers, operators, and enforcement agencies. Because existing evaluation frameworks were either too focused on societal/economic impacts, automated vehicles, or clinical reporting standards, the authors sought to create a customized framework capable of handling the project’s iterative development process and mixed-methods requirements. The methodology involved reviewing six established frameworks from automotive, transportation, and clinical research fields: FESTA, the Trilateral Impact Assessment Framework, System Dynamic Modelling, the Rainbow Framework, and the CONSORT and STROBE statements. The authors determined that no single existing framework adequately covered the combined needs of technology development, user experience, safety, and impact assessment. Consequently, they developed a new evaluation framework using the FESTA methodology as its foundation, integrating components from the other reviewed frameworks to ensure thoroughness and flexibility. This new framework was designed to harmonize data collection, analysis, and reporting across all studies within the PANACEA project. The resulting PANACEA evaluation framework structures the assessment process into three sequential phases: planning, implementation, and analysis/reporting. It supports an iterative development cycle where technical validation precedes data collection, and results from simulator and roadside pilots are fed back to refine algorithms and system integration. The framework distinguishes between technical validation of individual sensors and the assessment of the full Commercial Health Toolkit’s performance in operation. It employs a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative data to evaluate technical performance, operability, user experience, and socioeconomic impact. The framework ensures that experimental plans across different project activities are harmonized, allowing for the consolidation of results for final impact analysis. The significance of this work lies in providing a robust, systematic evidence base for assessing the progress and impact of the PANACEA system over time. By establishing a common framework, the project ensures that data collected across various pilot sites and study designs are comparable and comprehensive. The authors conclude that this framework not only facilitates the effective evaluation of the PANACEA system but also serves as a useful model for similar research and innovation projects that require the integration of technical development with rigorous, multi-dimensional evaluation.
Key finding
A new evaluation framework was developed by combining components from six existing frameworks, primarily based on FESTA, to systematically assess the fitness-to-drive system for commercial drivers.
Methodology
review
Provenance
The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | Crossref | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-05 |
| archive | success | canonical_url | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-06 |
| extract | success | cached | — | — | 3 | 2026-06-10 |
| clean | success | clean | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-07 |
| chunk | success | chunk | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-07 |
| embed | success | embed | Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B | — | 1 | 2026-06-07 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-05 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 15 | 2026-06-11 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.
Information type
What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).
- Applied Guidance: countermeasure evaluation
- Methodological Resource: tool software, validation psychometrics