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 *

378 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27655754)

  • 1. Were they in the loop during automated driving? Links between visual attention and crash potential.
    Louw T; Madigan R; Carsten O; Merat N
    Inj Prev; 2017 Aug; 23(4):281-286. PubMed ID: 27655754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. The effect of motor control requirements on drivers' eye-gaze pattern during automated driving.
    Goncalves RC; Louw TL; Quaresma M; Madigan R; Merat N
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Dec; 148():105788. PubMed ID: 33039820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Drivers' gaze patterns when resuming control with a head-up-display: Effects of automation level and time budget.
    Xu C; Louw TL; Merat N; Li P; Hu M; Li Y
    Accid Anal Prev; 2023 Feb; 180():106905. PubMed ID: 36508949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Control task substitution in semiautomated driving: does it matter what aspects are automated?
    Carsten O; Lai FC; Barnard Y; Jamson AH; Merat N
    Hum Factors; 2012 Oct; 54(5):747-61. PubMed ID: 23156620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Performance of an Additional Task During Level 2 Automated Driving: An On-Road Study Comparing Drivers With and Without Experience With Partial Automation.
    Solís-Marcos I; Ahlström C; Kircher K
    Hum Factors; 2018 Sep; 60(6):778-792. PubMed ID: 29791201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Towards unpacking older drivers' visual-motor coordination: A gaze-based integrated driving assessment.
    Sun QC; Xia JC; He J; Foster J; Falkmer T; Lee H
    Accid Anal Prev; 2018 Apr; 113():85-96. PubMed ID: 29407672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparing drivers' visual attention at Junctions in Real and Simulated Environments.
    Robbins CJ; Allen HA; Chapman P
    Appl Ergon; 2019 Oct; 80():89-101. PubMed ID: 31280814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Highly automated driving, secondary task performance, and driver state.
    Merat N; Jamson AH; Lai FC; Carsten O
    Hum Factors; 2012 Oct; 54(5):762-71. PubMed ID: 23156621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Estimating the out-of-the-loop phenomenon from visual strategies during highly automated driving.
    Schnebelen D; Charron C; Mars F
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Dec; 148():105776. PubMed ID: 33039817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Keep Your Scanners Peeled: Gaze Behavior as a Measure of Automation Trust During Highly Automated Driving.
    Hergeth S; Lorenz L; Vilimek R; Krems JF
    Hum Factors; 2016 May; 58(3):509-19. PubMed ID: 26843570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Reading text while driving: understanding drivers' strategic and tactical adaptation to distraction.
    Liang Y; Horrey WJ; Hoffman JD
    Hum Factors; 2015 Mar; 57(2):347-59. PubMed ID: 25850162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.