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 *

172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35708240)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. The effects of takeover request lead time on drivers' situation awareness for manually exiting from freeways: A web-based study on level 3 automated vehicles.
    Tan X; Zhang Y
    Accid Anal Prev; 2022 Apr; 168():106593. PubMed ID: 35180465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effects of scheduled manual driving on drowsiness and response to take over request: A simulator study towards understanding drivers in automated driving.
    Wu Y; Kihara K; Takeda Y; Sato T; Akamatsu M; Kitazaki S
    Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Mar; 124():202-209. PubMed ID: 30665055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Examining drivers' eye glance patterns during distracted driving: Insights from scanning randomness and glance transition matrix.
    Wang Y; Bao S; Du W; Ye Z; Sayer JR
    J Safety Res; 2017 Dec; 63():149-155. PubMed ID: 29203013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Effects of unreliable automation, non-driving related task, and takeover time budget on drivers' takeover performance and workload.
    Shahini F; Park J; Welch K; Zahabi M
    Ergonomics; 2023 Feb; 66(2):182-197. PubMed ID: 35451915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Task Interruption and Control Recovery Strategies After Take-Over Requests Emphasize Need for Measures of Situation Awareness.
    Vogelpohl T; Gehlmann F; Vollrath M
    Hum Factors; 2020 Nov; 62(7):1190-1211. PubMed ID: 31403839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Examination of drivers' cell phone use behavior at intersections by using naturalistic driving data.
    Xiong H; Bao S; Sayer J; Kato K
    J Safety Res; 2015 Sep; 54():89-93. PubMed ID: 26403907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The monitoring requests on young driver's fatigue and take-over performance in prolonged conditional automated driving.
    Yin J; Shao H; Zhang X
    J Safety Res; 2024 Feb; 88():285-292. PubMed ID: 38485370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Driver-initiated take-overs during critical evasion maneuvers in automated driving.
    Becker S; Brandenburg S; Thüring M
    Accid Anal Prev; 2024 Jan; 194():107362. PubMed ID: 37931430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Expert Drivers' Prospective Thinking-Aloud to Enhance Automated Driving Technologies - Investigating Uncertainty and Anticipation in Traffic.
    Grahn H; Kujala T; Silvennoinen J; Leppänen A; Saariluoma P
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Oct; 146():105717. PubMed ID: 32798781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Anticipatory Driving in Automated Vehicles: The Effects of Driving Experience and Distraction.
    He D; DeGuzman CA; Donmez B
    Hum Factors; 2023 Jun; 65(4):663. PubMed ID: 34348496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluating driver eye glance behavior and secondary task engagement while using driving automation systems.
    Noble AM; Miles M; Perez MA; Guo F; Klauer SG
    Accid Anal Prev; 2021 Mar; 151():105959. PubMed ID: 33385962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Calibration of Trust in Automated Driving: A Matter of Initial Level of Trust and Automated Driving Style?
    Manchon JB; Bueno M; Navarro J
    Hum Factors; 2023 Dec; 65(8):1613-1629. PubMed ID: 34861787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effect of cognitive load on drivers' State and task performance during automated driving: Introducing a novel method for determining stabilisation time following take-over of control.
    Melnicuk V; Thompson S; Jennings P; Birrell S
    Accid Anal Prev; 2021 Mar; 151():105967. PubMed ID: 33444868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. The Effect of Partial Automation on Driver Attention: A Naturalistic Driving Study.
    Gaspar J; Carney C
    Hum Factors; 2019 Dec; 61(8):1261-1276. PubMed ID: 30920852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Transitions Between Highly Automated and Longitudinally Assisted Driving: The Role of the Initiator in the Fight for Authority.
    Maggi D; Romano R; Carsten O
    Hum Factors; 2022 May; 64(3):601-612. PubMed ID: 32865032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Driving context influences drivers' decision to engage in visual-manual phone tasks: Evidence from a naturalistic driving study.
    Tivesten E; Dozza M
    J Safety Res; 2015 Jun; 53():87-96. PubMed ID: 25934001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A model for naturalistic glance behavior around Tesla Autopilot disengagements.
    Morando A; Gershon P; Mehler B; Reimer B
    Accid Anal Prev; 2021 Oct; 161():106348. PubMed ID: 34492560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.