A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Preliminary testing of eye gaze interfaces for controlling a haptic system intended to support play in children with physical impairments: Attentive versus explicit interfaces. | LitMetric

Introduction: Children with physical impairments may face challenges to play because of their motor impairments, which could lead to negative impacts in their development. The objective of this article was to compare two eye gaze interfaces that identified the desired toy a user wanted to reach with a haptic-enabled telerobotic system in a play activity.

Methods: One of the interfaces was an attentive user interface predicted the toy that children wanted to reach by observing where they incidentally focused their gaze. The other was an explicit eye input interface determined the toy after the child dwelled for 500 ms on a selection point. Five typically developing children, an adult with cerebral palsy (CP) and a child with CP participated in this study. They controlled the robotic system to play a whack-a-mole game.

Results: The prediction accuracy of the attentive interface was higher than 89% in average, for all participants. All participants did the activity faster with the attentive interface than with the explicit interface.

Conclusions: Overall, the attentive interface was faster and easier to use, especially for children. Children needed constant prompting and were not 100% successful at using the explicit interface.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8891927PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20556683221079694DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

attentive interface
12
eye gaze
8
gaze interfaces
8
children physical
8
physical impairments
8
wanted reach
8
system play
8
children
6
interface
6
attentive
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!