Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 143
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 994
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3134
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
People with severe upper limb paralysis use devices that monitor head movements to control computer cursors. The three most common methods for producing mouse button clicks are dwell-time, sip-and-puff control, and voice-recognition. Here, we tested a new method in which small tooth-clicks were detected by an accelerometer contacting the side of the head. The resulting signals were paired with head tracking technology to provide combined cursor and button control. This system was compared with sip-and-puff control and dwell-time selection. A group of 17 people with disabilities and ten people without disabilities tested each system by producing mouse clicks as inputs to two software programs. Tooth-click/head-mouse control was much faster than dwell-time control and not quite as fast as sip-and-puff control, but it was more reliable and less cumbersome than the latter.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2008.921161 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!