1992
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb02024.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multidimensional Risk Assessment versus Age as Criterion for Retirement of Airline Pilots

Abstract: An improved medical certification test could identify those pathologic conditions that might occur more frequently in older subjects. If pilots also underwent adequate performance testing, a gradual increase of the retirement age to approximately age 70 would seem justified. In the future, a longitudinal database should be established to validate medical tests for their ability to predict a pilot's accident risk. Using individual pilots as their own controls might be more sensitive than using population-based … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The major merit of this study is that it clearly contradicts the findings of a frequently cited, but flawed, 1983 study 2 that found an increase in accident risk of airline pilots after the age of 60 years. The new report supports our earlier conclusion that the age 60 criterion for retirement of airline pilots is not supported by current scientific evidence 3 …”
supporting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The major merit of this study is that it clearly contradicts the findings of a frequently cited, but flawed, 1983 study 2 that found an increase in accident risk of airline pilots after the age of 60 years. The new report supports our earlier conclusion that the age 60 criterion for retirement of airline pilots is not supported by current scientific evidence 3 …”
supporting
confidence: 81%
“…This new report is based on an analysis of a large consolidated database combining databases from the FAA (pilot certification and flight experience data) and the NTSB (aircraft accident data) from 1976 to 1988. The main findings of this carefully conducted study were: (1) there was no support for the hypothesis that airline pilots of scheduled air carriers have increased accident rates as they neared the age of 60 years (because of the age 60 regulation, no data were available for this category of airline pilots beyond the age of 60); (2) when the accident risk of experienced class III (general aviation) airline pilots aged 50 to 70 years was examined, no effect for age was found; (3) however, using extremely conservative statistical criteria, the authors could not exclude an increase of accident risk for class III pilots after the age of 63 years. The authors recommend a cautious increase of the mandatory retirement age to age 63.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compatible with this age boundary, other studies of pilot cognition have found 40 years old to be a useful demarcation to show age-group differences in pilot cognition (e.g., Szafran, 1966;Tsang & Shaner, 1998). These outlier results suggest that perhaps as a preventive measure, routine medical examinations should include at least a brief neurocognitive assessment for pilots after their 40th birthday (see also Mohler, 1993;Stuck, van Gorp, Josephson, Morgenstern, & Beck, 1992).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Such age‐related changes have formed one rationale for the controversial “Age‐60 Rule” of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that requires mandatory retirement of airline pilots at age 60. On the other hand, a recent critical review of this topic laments the absence of specific task performance data to document the effects of age on flying ability and suggests that the “Age‐60 Rule” has not been scientifically justified 8 …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%