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 *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29122198)

  • 1. Effect of police mobile computer terminal interface design on officer driving distraction.
    Zahabi M; Kaber D
    Appl Ergon; 2018 Feb; 67():26-38. PubMed ID: 29122198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of Mobile Computer Terminal Configuration and Level of Driving Control on Police Officers' Performance and Workload.
    Shupsky T; Lyman A; He J; Zahabi M
    Hum Factors; 2021 Sep; 63(6):1106-1120. PubMed ID: 32149529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Identification of task demands and usability issues in police use of mobile computing terminals.
    Zahabi M; Kaber D
    Appl Ergon; 2018 Jan; 66():161-171. PubMed ID: 28958425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of Secondary Tasks on Police Officer Cognitive Workload and Performance Under Normal and Pursuit Driving Situations.
    Zahabi M; Nasr V; Mohammed Abdul Razak A; Patranella B; McCanless L; Maredia A
    Hum Factors; 2023 Aug; 65(5):809-822. PubMed ID: 33874772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Human factors in police mobile computer terminals: A systematic review and survey of recent literature, guideline formulation, and future research directions.
    Zahabi M; Pankok C; Park J
    Appl Ergon; 2020 Apr; 84():103041. PubMed ID: 31987503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of variable priority training on police officer driving performance and workload.
    Zahabi M; Nasr V; Abdul Razak AM; McCanless L; Maredia A; Patranella B; Wozniak D; Shahini F
    Ergonomics; 2022 Aug; 65(8):1057-1070. PubMed ID: 34851230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Physical and cognitive demands associated with police in-vehicle technology use: an on-road case study.
    Zahabi M; Shahini F; Yin W; Zhang X
    Ergonomics; 2022 Jan; 65(1):91-104. PubMed ID: 34308789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Mobile phone conversation distraction: Understanding differences in impact between simulator and naturalistic driving studies.
    Wijayaratna KP; Cunningham ML; Regan MA; Jian S; Chand S; Dixit VV
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Aug; 129():108-118. PubMed ID: 31150917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Self-regulation of driving speed among distracted drivers: An application of driver behavioral adaptation theory.
    Oviedo-Trespalacios O; Haque MM; King M; Washington S
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2017 Aug; 18(6):599-605. PubMed ID: 28095026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Measuring driver distraction - Evaluation of the box task method as a tool for assessing in-vehicle system demand.
    Morgenstern T; Wögerbauer EM; Naujoks F; Krems JF; Keinath A
    Appl Ergon; 2020 Oct; 88():103181. PubMed ID: 32678787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparing the demands of destination entry using Google Glass and the Samsung Galaxy S4 during simulated driving.
    Beckers N; Schreiner S; Bertrand P; Mehler B; Reimer B
    Appl Ergon; 2017 Jan; 58():25-34. PubMed ID: 27633195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Effects of an in-vehicle eco-safe driving system on drivers' glance behaviour.
    Li X; Vaezipour A; Rakotonirainy A; Demmel S
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Jan; 122():143-152. PubMed ID: 30384084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Chinese handwriting while driving: Effects of handwritten box size on in-vehicle information systems usability and driver distraction.
    Zhong Q; Guo G; Zhi J
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2023; 24(1):26-31. PubMed ID: 36178277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cognitive workload classification of law enforcement officers using physiological responses.
    Wozniak D; Zahabi M
    Appl Ergon; 2024 Sep; 119():104305. PubMed ID: 38733659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Driver distraction: the effects of concurrent in-vehicle tasks, road environment complexity and age on driving performance.
    Horberry T; Anderson J; Regan MA; Triggs TJ; Brown J
    Accid Anal Prev; 2006 Jan; 38(1):185-91. PubMed ID: 16226211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of visible presence of policing activities on drivers' vigilance and intention to refrain from non-driving activities: A scenario-based survey of general Japanese drivers.
    Nakano Y; Okamura K; Kosuge R; Kihira M; Fujita G
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Dec; 133():105293. PubMed ID: 31561115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of cognitive distraction on perception-response time to unexpected abrupt and gradually onset roadway hazards.
    D'Addario P; Donmez B
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Jun; 127():177-185. PubMed ID: 30897523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An evaluation of touchscreen versus keyboard/mouse interaction for large screen process control displays.
    Noah B; Li J; Rothrock L
    Appl Ergon; 2017 Oct; 64():1-13. PubMed ID: 28610809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of the influence of mobile data terminal location on physical exposures during simulated police patrol activities.
    McKinnon CD; Callaghan JP; Dickerson CR
    Appl Ergon; 2012 Sep; 43(5):859-67. PubMed ID: 22318006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.