The research behind
this website.

Aim: To examine whether the dual process model of coping with bereavement is a useful framework for understanding driving retirement, and to evaluate the perceived impact of an evidence informed workshop on older adults’ emotional (loss oriented) and practical/mobility (restoration oriented) coping and planning. 

Method: A longitudinal qualitative evaluation of a free, interactive three‑hour driving retirement workshop delivered by clinical psychologists and driver retirement experts in the ACT (Australia). Participants completed surveys pre‑workshop, one week post‑workshop, and six weeks post‑workshop; free‑text responses were analysed using content analysis. A matched sample of 25 participants (aged 64–93 years) provided data across all three timepoints. 

Key findings: 

• Participants’ concerns and experiences mapped clearly onto the dual process model, spanning both loss-oriented stressors (e.g., grief, frustration, perceived loss of independence/identity) and restoration-oriented stressors (e.g., maintaining mobility and daily activities). 

• Immediately after the workshop, participants reported reduced grief and fewer practical concerns, alongside increased validation of their emotional responses and greater consideration of alternative transport options. 

• Over the six-week follow-up, many participants began trialling new mobility strategies (e.g., public transport, walking more, seeking lifts/support, using rideshare or mobility aids), indicating movement toward restoration-oriented coping. 

• Perceptions changed over time in a nonlinear way (e.g., grief reduced postworkshop then rose again at follow-up), consistent with oscillation between loss and restoration focused coping. 

Implications: Findings support using a grief-informed, dual process lens to design driving retirement supports that deliberately address both emotional adjustment and practical mobility planning. Interventions may be most helpful when offered early, to allow time for gradual planning and experimentation with transport alternatives, and they should include mechanisms for emotional validation alongside locally relevant information about transport options. Given variability in need, scalable programs (including group, digital, and referral pathways for more individualised support) may improve wellbeing and sustain community participation for older adults transitioning away from driving. 

Aim: To identify and synthesise existing decision tools, scales, and aids (including peer‑reviewed and grey literature) that support older adults in deciding whether and when to retire from driving, and to examine what these resources contain and how they operate. 

Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (PROSPERO: CRD420251239566). Searches of Medline and PsycINFO databases were conducted, plus grey literature was screened (e.g., targeted organisation websites and Google; first 150 results per term screened). Inclusion required a question-based resource designed for the older driver to complete to support driving-retirement decision-making. Data were extracted on study/resource characteristics (e.g., design, item format, feedback, validation). Item-level thematic analysis (meta-synthesis) used inductive coding to generate themes/sub-themes, alongside frequency analysis. 

Key findings: 

• 19 resources were identified (11 peer‑reviewed; 8 grey literature), largely from Western, English-speaking countries. 

• Resources varied widely in length and format (median 20 items; range 6–101), with yes/no items most common (~59%). 

• Five overarching content themes emerged (24 sub-themes): external influences, safety factors, planning, emotional factors, and mobility factors. 

• Safety factors dominated item content (54.8% of all items), especially driving ability; planning and mobility factors were least represented. 

• Few resources reported validation (only a minority described any validation approach; none of the grey literature resources reported development/validation). 

• Many resources provided limited or no user feedback; none provided a clear, concrete recommendation on whether the user should stop driving. 

Implications: 

There is a gap in evidence-based, validated decision supports that translates self-reflection into actionable guidance. Future resources should better balance safety with planning, mobility alternatives, emotional impacts, and social/support influences to reflect the full decision context. Stronger and more transparent development and validation processes (e.g., expert consensus/Delphi work and testing across diverse populations and diagnoses) are needed, and partnerships between researchers and community organisations may improve both scientific rigour and dissemination/uptake. Improved decisional resources could also complement fitness-to-drive policy and clinical practice by supporting earlier conversations, preparation, and more consistent assessment pathways. 

Aim  
This systematic review aimed to examine the relationship between driving cessation and depressive symptomology in older adults, drawing on both cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence to better understand the magnitude and nature of this association. 

Methods  
The review was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines, with searches of PsycINFO, PubMed, and Scopus, and no limits on publication date. 

Eligibility criteria included: 

• Participants aged 65 years and older  

• Inclusion of individuals who had stopped driving  

• Use of validated measures of depressive symptoms  

Studies focused solely on populations with cognitive impairment (e.g., dementia) were excluded. Due to high heterogeneity across studies, a meta-analysis was not conducted; instead, findings were synthesised qualitatively. 

Key findings: 

• Driving cessation is consistently associated with increased depressive symptoms in older adults.  

• Evidence from longitudinal studies suggests this relationship may persist over time, not just immediately after stopping driving.  

• The strength of the association varies across studies, reflecting differences in populations, measures, and study design.  

• There is limited understanding of how depressive symptoms evolve over the long-term following driving cessation.  

Implications: 
Findings highlight that driving cessation is not only a mobility issue but also a mental health concern. There is a need for interventions that extend beyond preparing individuals to stop driving and instead provide ongoing psychological and social support after cessation. Better understanding of long-term impacts can inform the development of targeted supports to promote healthy ageing and wellbeing following driving retirement. 

Aim  
This systematic review aimed to examine existing research on interventions and strategies that support older adults transitioning from driving to driving cessation, with a focus on improving mobility, well-being, and planning for this transition. 

Methods  
The authors conducted a comprehensive search across nine databases, screening nearly 10,000 records. Twelve studies were included: 

• 3 controlled intervention studies evaluating formal programs  

• 9 strategy-based studies (qualitative or descriptive) 

Additional program toolkits were also reviewed to identify practical resources for supporting driving cessation.  

Key findings: 

• Older adults are highly dependent on private cars and rarely plan for driving cessation.  

• Driving cessation is often reactive and crisis-driven, leading to negative impacts such as reduced independence, social isolation, and poorer mental health.  

• Effective strategies cluster around six themes: early/proactive planning, involving multiple stakeholders (drivers, families, clinicians), collaborative decision-making, focusing on future mobility (not just driving ability), and planning alternative transport options.  

Implications: 
There is a clear need to shift from reactive assessments to proactive, person-centred planning for driving retirement. Healthcare professionals—particularly occupational therapists—should initiate early conversations and support transport planning. However, more rigorous research and large-scale interventions are needed to build a strong evidence base and better support ageing populations to maintain mobility and quality of life. 

Aim  
This systematic review and meta-synthesis aimed to identify and understand the factors that influence older adults’ planning for driving retirement, with a focus on the emotional, social, and contextual drivers of decision-making. 

Methods 
A systematic search was conducted using PRISMA guidelines across four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Global Health, and CINAHL), covering studies published between 2000 and 2021. Thirteen studies met inclusion criteria, with one excluded after quality appraisal, resulting in 12 qualitative or mixed-method studies. 

A thematic meta-synthesis was undertaken, using inductive coding and grouping of themes, guided by the Social-Ecological Model (SEM). This enabled identification of factors across individual, interpersonal, environmental, and policy levels. 

Key findings: 

• Planning for driving retirement is influenced by multiple interconnected factors across SEM levels.  

• At the individual level, emotions, identity, and desire for independence (e.g., maintaining control) play a major role.  

• At the interpersonal level, family, friends, and healthcare professionals strongly influence decision-making.  

• At the environmental and policy levels, access to alternative transport and broader system supports shape planning.  

• Barriers include fear of losing independence and becoming a burden, while facilitators include supportive relationships and access to viable transport options.  

Implications: 
Findings highlight the need for multi-level, holistic approaches to support planning for driving retirement. Interventions should not focus solely on the individual, but also address family dynamics, healthcare engagement, and transport systems. Early, supportive conversations and improved access to alternative transport options are critical to enabling proactive planning and reducing negative outcomes associated with driving cessation.