2017
DOI: 10.3849/aimt.01186
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Wearable Systems and Methods for Monitoring Psychological and Physical Condition of Soldiers

Abstract: From the second half of the 1990s, thanks to more affordable and more powerful information technology and electronical systems for recording based on miniaturized sensors, we can observe a more intensive development of a method of data analysis and a system that monitors the physical and psychological conditions of soldiers. Systems for measuring and evaluation methods of physical and medical data for the diagnostics of physical and psychological state have significantly spread, especially in clinical practice… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 46 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Quantifying even the amount of variability in parameters has proven very difficult (Boehm et al, 2018;Ratcliff & Tuerlinckx, 2002) and only a handful of studies to date have attempted to quantify trial-to-trial variation in EAM parameters (Boehm et al, 2014;Gunawan et al, 2022;van Maanen et al, 2011) with some limiting factors (e.g., the full data set was required in advance). To-date, most applications of operator-state triggered adaptive automation have explored the use of wearable psycho-physiological monitoring technologies (e.g., ECG, EEG), but there is limited evidence for the diagnosticity and predictive power of physiological measures for workload estimation (Charles & Nixon, 2019), and thus it remains unclear the extent to which metrics hold practical or operational advantages in real world contexts (Kutilek et al, 2017;Wilson & Eggemeier, 2020). We argue that EAMs that can quantify the latent cognitive workload of a human operator would be a more natural solution in this space if appropriate models could be developed.…”
Section: Adaptive Automationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Quantifying even the amount of variability in parameters has proven very difficult (Boehm et al, 2018;Ratcliff & Tuerlinckx, 2002) and only a handful of studies to date have attempted to quantify trial-to-trial variation in EAM parameters (Boehm et al, 2014;Gunawan et al, 2022;van Maanen et al, 2011) with some limiting factors (e.g., the full data set was required in advance). To-date, most applications of operator-state triggered adaptive automation have explored the use of wearable psycho-physiological monitoring technologies (e.g., ECG, EEG), but there is limited evidence for the diagnosticity and predictive power of physiological measures for workload estimation (Charles & Nixon, 2019), and thus it remains unclear the extent to which metrics hold practical or operational advantages in real world contexts (Kutilek et al, 2017;Wilson & Eggemeier, 2020). We argue that EAMs that can quantify the latent cognitive workload of a human operator would be a more natural solution in this space if appropriate models could be developed.…”
Section: Adaptive Automationmentioning
confidence: 99%