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 *

215 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24874650)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Requirements of a system to reduce car-to-vulnerable road user crashes in urban intersections.
    Habibovic A; Davidsson J
    Accid Anal Prev; 2011 Jul; 43(4):1570-80. PubMed ID: 21545892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The development and validation of video-based measures of drivers' following distance and gap acceptance behaviours.
    Horswill MS; Hill A; Silapurem L
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Oct; 146():105626. PubMed ID: 32950848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Determining the drivers' acceptance of EFTCD in highway work zones.
    Bai Y; Li Y
    Accid Anal Prev; 2011 May; 43(3):762-8. PubMed ID: 21376864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Pedestrian Detection During Vehicle Backing Maneuvers Using Ultrasonic Parking Sensors.
    Matsui Y; Hosokawa N; Oikawa S
    Stapp Car Crash J; 2019 Nov; 63():343-358. PubMed ID: 32311064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Influence of age and proximity warning devices on collision avoidance in simulated driving.
    Kramer AF; Cassavaugh N; Horrey WJ; Becic E; Mayhugh JL
    Hum Factors; 2007 Oct; 49(5):935-49. PubMed ID: 17915608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Design and evaluation of a prototype rear obstacle detection and driver warning system.
    Llaneras RE; Green CA; Kiefer RJ; Chundrlik WJ; Altan OD; Singer JP
    Hum Factors; 2005; 47(1):199-215. PubMed ID: 15960097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Drivers' attitudes toward front or rear child passenger belt use and seat belt reminders at these seating positions.
    Kidd DG; McCartt AT
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2014; 15(3):278-86. PubMed ID: 24372500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Driver Behavior During Overtaking Maneuvers from the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study.
    Chen R; Kusano KD; Gabler HC
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2015; 16 Suppl 2():S176-81. PubMed ID: 26436229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Age and gender differences in time to collision at braking from the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study.
    Montgomery J; Kusano KD; Gabler HC
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2014; 15 Suppl 1():S15-20. PubMed ID: 25307380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Developing an inverse time-to-collision crash alert timing approach based on drivers' last-second braking and steering judgments.
    Kiefer RJ; LeBlanc DJ; Flannagan CA
    Accid Anal Prev; 2005 Mar; 37(2):295-303. PubMed ID: 15667816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Driving with advanced vehicle technology: A qualitative investigation of older drivers' perceptions and motivations for use.
    Gish J; Vrkljan B; Grenier A; Van Miltenburg B
    Accid Anal Prev; 2017 Sep; 106():498-504. PubMed ID: 27499110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Driver trust in five driver assistance technologies following real-world use in four production vehicles.
    Kidd DG; Cicchino JB; Reagan IJ; Kerfoot LB
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2017 May; 18(sup1):S44-S50. PubMed ID: 28339302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Steering or braking avoidance response in SHRP2 rear-end crashes and near-crashes: A decision tree approach.
    Sarkar A; Hickman JS; McDonald AD; Huang W; Vogelpohl T; Markkula G
    Accid Anal Prev; 2021 May; 154():106055. PubMed ID: 33691227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Forward collision warning based on a driver model to increase drivers' acceptance.
    Puente Guillen P; Gohl I
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2019; 20(sup1):S21-S26. PubMed ID: 31381428
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Evaluation of the crash mitigation effect of low-speed automated emergency braking systems based on insurance claims data.
    Isaksson-Hellman I; Lindman M
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2016 Sep; 17 Suppl 1():42-7. PubMed ID: 27586101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. Towards an assistance strategy that reduces unnecessary collision alarms: An examination of the driver's perceived need for assistance.
    Kaß C; Schmidt GJ; Kunde W
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2019 Jun; 25(2):291-302. PubMed ID: 30035557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.