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 *

478 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27107472)

  • 1. Is take-over time all that matters? The impact of visual-cognitive load on driver take-over quality after conditionally automated driving.
    Zeeb K; Buchner A; Schrauf M
    Accid Anal Prev; 2016 Jul; 92():230-9. PubMed ID: 27107472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. From partial and high automation to manual driving: Relationship between non-driving related tasks, drowsiness and take-over performance.
    Naujoks F; Höfling S; Purucker C; Zeeb K
    Accid Anal Prev; 2018 Dec; 121():28-42. PubMed ID: 30205284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. What determines the take-over time? An integrated model approach of driver take-over after automated driving.
    Zeeb K; Buchner A; Schrauf M
    Accid Anal Prev; 2015 May; 78():212-221. PubMed ID: 25794922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Understanding take-over performance of high crash risk drivers during conditionally automated driving.
    Lin Q; Li S; Ma X; Lu G
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Aug; 143():105543. PubMed ID: 32485431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Asleep at the automated wheel-Sleepiness and fatigue during highly automated driving.
    Vogelpohl T; Kühn M; Hummel T; Vollrath M
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 May; 126():70-84. PubMed ID: 29571975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Age differences in the takeover of vehicle control and engagement in non-driving-related activities in simulated driving with conditional automation.
    Clark H; Feng J
    Accid Anal Prev; 2017 Sep; 106():468-479. PubMed ID: 27686942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Identifying cognitive distraction using steering wheel reversal rates.
    Kountouriotis GK; Spyridakos P; Carsten OMJ; Merat N
    Accid Anal Prev; 2016 Nov; 96():39-45. PubMed ID: 27497055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Assessing drivers' response during automated driver support system failures with non-driving tasks.
    Shen S; Neyens DM
    J Safety Res; 2017 Jun; 61():149-155. PubMed ID: 28454860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The role of self-regulation in the context of driver distraction: A simulator study.
    Wandtner B; Schumacher M; Schmidt EA
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2016 Jul; 17(5):472-9. PubMed ID: 27082493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of non-driving related tasks on readiness to take over control in conditionally automated driving.
    Lin QF; Lyu Y; Zhang KF; Ma XW
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2021; 22(8):629-633. PubMed ID: 34495787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Age-related differences in effects of non-driving related tasks on takeover performance in automated driving.
    Wu Y; Kihara K; Hasegawa K; Takeda Y; Sato T; Akamatsu M; Kitazaki S
    J Safety Res; 2020 Feb; 72():231-238. PubMed ID: 32199568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effects of brief visual interruption tasks on drivers' ability to resume their visual search for a pre-cued hazard.
    Borowsky A; Horrey WJ; Liang Y; Garabet A; Simmons L; Fisher DL
    Accid Anal Prev; 2016 Aug; 93():207-216. PubMed ID: 27209155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Using naturalistic driving study data to investigate the impact of driver distraction on driver's brake reaction time in freeway rear-end events in car-following situation.
    Gao J; Davis GA
    J Safety Res; 2017 Dec; 63():195-204. PubMed ID: 29203019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Coming back into the loop: Drivers' perceptual-motor performance in critical events after automated driving.
    Louw T; Markkula G; Boer E; Madigan R; Carsten O; Merat N
    Accid Anal Prev; 2017 Nov; 108():9-18. PubMed ID: 28837837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effective cues for accelerating young drivers' time to transfer control following a period of conditional automation.
    Wright TJ; Agrawal R; Samuel S; Wang Y; Zilberstein S; Fisher DL
    Accid Anal Prev; 2018 Jul; 116():14-20. PubMed ID: 29031513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Older driver distraction: a naturalistic study of behaviour at intersections.
    Charlton JL; Catchlove M; Scully M; Koppel S; Newstead S
    Accid Anal Prev; 2013 Sep; 58():271-8. PubMed ID: 23332726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. In a heart beat: Using driver's physiological changes to determine the quality of a takeover in highly automated vehicles.
    Alrefaie MT; Summerskill S; Jackon TW
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Oct; 131():180-190. PubMed ID: 31302486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. In the eye of the beholder: A simulator study of the impact of Google Glass on driving performance.
    Young KL; Stephens AN; Stephan KL; Stuart GW
    Accid Anal Prev; 2016 Jan; 86():68-75. PubMed ID: 26519889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Driving distracted with friends: Effect of passengers and driver distraction on young drivers' behavior.
    Zhang F; Mehrotra S; Roberts SC
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Nov; 132():105246. PubMed ID: 31421453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of varying levels of vehicle automation on drivers' lane changing behaviour.
    Madigan R; Louw T; Merat N
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(2):e0192190. PubMed ID: 29466402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 24.