These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20363812)

  • 1. Backing collisions: a study of drivers' eye and backing behaviour using combined rear-view camera and sensor systems.
    Hurwitz DS; Pradhan A; Fisher DL; Knodler MA; Muttart JW; Menon R; Meissner U
    Inj Prev; 2010 Apr; 16(2):79-84. PubMed ID: 20363812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Real-world effects of rear automatic braking and other backing assistance systems.
    Cicchino JB
    J Safety Res; 2019 Feb; 68():41-47. PubMed ID: 30876519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of rearview cameras and rear parking sensors on police-reported backing crashes.
    Cicchino JB
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2017 Nov; 18(8):859-865. PubMed ID: 28394632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Differences in glance behavior between drivers using a rearview camera, parking sensor system, both technologies, or no technology during low-speed parking maneuvers.
    Kidd DG; McCartt AT
    Accid Anal Prev; 2016 Feb; 87():92-101. PubMed ID: 26656150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Real-world effects of rear cross-traffic alert on police-reported backing crashes.
    Cicchino JB
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Feb; 123():350-355. PubMed ID: 30580146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Buick Lucerne drivers' experiences with rear parking sensors.
    Cicchino JB; Eichelberger AH; McCartt AT
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2015; 16(2):196-201. PubMed ID: 24874650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effectiveness of a rearview camera and parking sensor system alone and combined for preventing a collision with an unexpected stationary or moving object.
    Kidd DG; Hagoski BK; Tucker TG; Chiang DP
    Hum Factors; 2015 Jun; 57(4):689-700. PubMed ID: 25977326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Visibility of children behind 2010-2013 model year passenger vehicles using glances, mirrors, and backup cameras and parking sensors.
    Kidd DG; Brethwaite A
    Accid Anal Prev; 2014 May; 66():158-67. PubMed ID: 24556585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Sensor Fused Rear Cross Traffic Detection System Using Transfer Learning.
    Park J; Yu W
    Sensors (Basel); 2021 Sep; 21(18):. PubMed ID: 34577263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Relationship between pedestrian detection specifications of parking sensor and potential safety benefits.
    Kikuchi K; Hashimoto H; Hosokawa T; Nawata K; Hirao A
    Accid Anal Prev; 2021 Mar; 151():105951. PubMed ID: 33360876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of Technology on Drivers' Behavior during Backing Maneuvers.
    Matsui Y; Oikawa S
    Stapp Car Crash J; 2020 Nov; 64():269-289. PubMed ID: 33636007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Drivers' eye movements as a function of collision avoidance warning conditions in red light running scenarios.
    Zhang Y; Yan X; Li X; Xue Q
    Accid Anal Prev; 2016 Nov; 96():185-197. PubMed ID: 27543896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Driver behaviors assisted by different human machine interfaces to avoid rear-end collisions during level 2 automated driving.
    Yang B; Saito T; Wang Z; Kitazaki S; Nakano K
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2023; 24(6):475-481. PubMed ID: 37339499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Increase in rear-end collision risk by acute stress-induced fatigue in on-road truck driving.
    Minusa S; Mizuno K; Ojiro D; Tanaka T; Kuriyama H; Yamano E; Kuratsune H; Watanabe Y
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(10):e0258892. PubMed ID: 34673839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Drivers' behavioral responses to combined speed and red light cameras.
    Polders E; Cornu J; De Ceunynck T; Daniels S; Brijs K; Brijs T; Hermans E; Wets G
    Accid Anal Prev; 2015 Aug; 81():153-66. PubMed ID: 25988809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of Expected Crash and Injury Reduction from Production Forward Collision and Lane Departure Warning Systems.
    Kusano KD; Gabler HC
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2015; 16 Suppl 2():S109-14. PubMed ID: 26436219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Analysis of bus drivers reaction to simulated traffic collision situations - eye-tracking studies.
    Bortkiewicz A; Gadzicka E; Siedlecka J; Kosobudzki M; Dania M; Szymczak W; Jóźwiak Z; Szyjkowska A; Viebig P; Pas-Wyroślak A; Makowiec-Dąbrowska T; Kapitaniak B; Hickman JS
    Int J Occup Med Environ Health; 2019 Apr; 32(2):161-174. PubMed ID: 30575822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Road safety from the perspective of driver gender and age as related to the injury crash frequency and road scenario.
    Russo F; Biancardo SA; Dell'Acqua G
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2014; 15(1):25-33. PubMed ID: 24279963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Experiences of model year 2011 Dodge and Jeep owners with collision avoidance and related technologies.
    Cicchino JB; McCartt AT
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2015; 16():298-303. PubMed ID: 24983299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of tactile, visual, and auditory warnings for rear-end collision prevention in simulated driving.
    Scott JJ; Gray R
    Hum Factors; 2008 Apr; 50(2):264-75. PubMed ID: 18516837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.