Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Human Interaction with Space-Based Systems
Published in Lauren Blackwell Landon, Kelley J. Slack, Eduardo Salas, Psychology and Human Performance in Space Programs, 2020
Kritina Holden, Jessica J. Marquez, Gordon Vos, E. Vincent Cross II
Cognitive overload impacts performance when the quantity of information an individual must process in the time available exceeds their cognitive or mental resources. Individuals have limited cognitive resources for sensing, perceiving, interpreting, and acting upon information in the world. The amount of information an individual is able to acquire and process may be affected by stress, fatigue, time constraints, and the modality of that information (visual, auditory, etc.). Confusion can occur when the individual is unable to maintain a cohesive and orderly awareness of events and required actions and experiences, a state characterized by bewilderment, lack of clear thinking, or disorientation. Lack of transparency or predictability of a given task can lead to situations where users do not have a true understanding of the state of the system, which can also contribute to task overhead and confusion (Dix et al., 2004). During periods of confusion, an individual’s performance on one or multiple tasks may be considerably reduced (Wickens, 1991). Cognitive overload and confusion have been cited as causal reasons for multiple aviation accidents. An example of cognitive overload causing an incident in spaceflight is the June 1997 collision between the Russian spacecraft Progress 234 and the Mir Space Station, which caused the pressure hull to rupture and nearly led to the Mir being abandoned. High workload and stress of the crew due to repeated system failures throughout the mission likely contributed to reduced vigilance (Ellis, 2000).
Does standardisation improve post-operative anaesthesia handoffs? Meta-analyses on provider, patient, organisational, and handoff outcomes
Published in Ergonomics, 2022
Elizabeth H. Lazzara, Richard J. Simonson, Logan M. Gisick, Andrew C. Griggs, Emily A. Rickel, Joyce Wahr, Meghan B. Lane-Fall, Joseph R. Keebler
Before we discuss the implications of standardisation, we offer several explanations underpinning the apparent positive effects of standardisation efforts in this domain. One explanation could be that standardisation often entails a checklist or other cognitive aid, and such tools foster memory by facilitating the maintenance of working memory and mitigating failures in long-term memory (Chaparro et al. 2019). A second explanation could be that standardisation serves as a mechanism to reduce unwanted clinical variability (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2015). Standardisation offers a means to reduce individual differences and biases concerning what information is deemed ‘important’ during a handoff. A third possible explanation is that standardisation offers an avenue to enhance shared mental models (Keebler et al. 2016), which refers to an organised knowledge structure that is the foundation for understanding and decision making (Gisick et al. 2018). A final potential explanation is that standardisation strengthens communication by providing grounds for shared language and integration of bidirectionality. In other words, standardisation often improves communication by offering an opportunity for the handoff recipient to clarify issues and ask questions [e.g. Flex 11 (Lazzara et al. 2016) and IPASS (Starmer et al. 2014)], and it codifies language to ensure that providers are all using the same terminology. Considering that the lexicon of medicine is rapidly expanding with the explosion of new technologies and interventions, it is key that all providers are using familiar jargon to avoid confusion or ambiguity.
Wearable electroencephalography for ultra-long-term seizure monitoring: a systematic review and future prospects
Published in Expert Review of Medical Devices, 2021
Jonas Munch Nielsen, Dirk Rades, Troels Wesenberg Kjaer
Clinical management and drug trials rely on self-reported seizure counts as a measure of disease burden and for evaluation of drug efficacy [5]. However, studies have found that self-reported seizure documentation is unreliable in part due to post-ictal confusion and seizure induced impaired awareness [6–9]. Erroneously subjective seizure reporting may lead to suboptimal treatment consequently increasing the morbidity and mortality and to non-seizure free patients driving or engaging in other high-risk activities [10–12]. A survey evaluating self-estimated seizure documentation found that only around 50% of seizures were reported from participants in clinical drug trials [13].
Brain Tumor Classification Using Enhanced Statistical Texture Features
Published in IETE Journal of Research, 2022
Mallikarjun Mudda, R. Manjunath, N. Krishnamurthy
As the next part of experimental analysis, Brain tumor detection performance [24] is evaluated by constructing the confusion matrix by using 91 MR images of different patients for classification in our work, as shown in Table 1. Where TPR, FPR, FNR and TNR represent True Positive Rate that can be defined as . The second term False Positive Rate can be denoted by using , False Negative Rate as and True Negative Rate defined as .