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.
5. Approaching autonomous driving with cautious optimism: analysis of road traffic injuries involving autonomous vehicles based on field test data. Ye W, Wang C, Chen F, Yan S, Li L. Inj Prev; 2021 Feb; 27(1):42-47. PubMed ID: 31915269 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Advancing investigation of automated vehicle crashes using text analytics of crash narratives and Bayesian analysis. Lee S, Arvin R, Khattak AJ. Accid Anal Prev; 2023 Mar; 181():106932. PubMed ID: 36580765 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Development and validation of a questionnaire to assess public receptivity toward autonomous vehicles and its relation with the traffic safety climate in China. Qu W, Xu J, Ge Y, Sun X, Zhang K. Accid Anal Prev; 2019 Jul; 128():78-86. PubMed ID: 30986638 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. What can we learn from autonomous vehicle collision data on crash severity? A cost-sensitive CART approach. Zhu S, Meng Q. Accid Anal Prev; 2022 Sep; 174():106769. PubMed ID: 35858521 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Mining patterns of autonomous vehicle crashes involving vulnerable road users to understand the associated factors. Kutela B, Das S, Dadashova B. Accid Anal Prev; 2022 Feb; 165():106473. PubMed ID: 34774280 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Crash comparison of autonomous and conventional vehicles using pre-crash scenario typology. Liu Q, Wang X, Wu X, Glaser Y, He L. Accid Anal Prev; 2021 Sep; 159():106281. PubMed ID: 34273622 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. An intelligent dynamic cyber physical system threat detection system for ensuring secured communication in 6G autonomous vehicle networks. M S, R S P. Sci Rep; 2024 Sep 05; 14(1):20795. PubMed ID: 39242659 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Trajectory planning framework for autonomous vehicles based on collision injury prediction for vulnerable road users. Guo Y, Liu Y, Wang B, Huang P, Xu H, Bai Z. Accid Anal Prev; 2024 Aug 05; 203():107610. PubMed ID: 38749269 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparative study of collision types between automated and conventional vehicles using Bayesian probabilistic inferences. Novat N, Kidando E, Kutela B, Kitali AE. J Safety Res; 2023 Feb 05; 84():251-260. PubMed ID: 36868654 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Network-wide safety impacts of dedicated lanes for connected and autonomous vehicles. Sha H, Singh MK, Haouari R, Papazikou E, Quddus M, Quigley C, Chaudhry A, Thomas P, Weijermars W, Morris A. Accid Anal Prev; 2024 Feb 05; 195():107424. PubMed ID: 38091887 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Development of a Framework for Generating Driving Safety Assessment Scenarios for Automated Vehicles. Ko W, Park S, Yun J, Park S, Yun I. Sensors (Basel); 2022 Aug 12; 22(16):. PubMed ID: 36015798 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Pedestrians' road-crossing behavior towards eHMI-equipped autonomous vehicles driving in segregated and mixed traffic conditions. Song Y, Jiang Q, Chen W, Zhuang X, Ma G. Accid Anal Prev; 2023 Aug 12; 188():107115. PubMed ID: 37209555 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]