Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36687906›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Cognitive assistance for action selection: Challenges and approaches.

Benjamin Strenge, Thomas Schack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Benjamin StrengeNeurocognition and Action Research Group, Faculty of Psychology and Sports Science, Center for Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC), Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Thomas SchackNeurocognition and Action Research Group, Faculty of Psychology and Sports Science, Center for Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC), Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive assistance systems aim at compensating shortcomings of natural cognition concerning specific activities. Notable progress has been made regarding data acquisition, analysis, and the exploration of technical means for supporting human action selection and execution. The related challenges and potential solutions can be associated to four largely independent questions: What actions should be executed, when this must or should be done, whether assistance is needed for a specific action, and if so, how the action should be supported. A broad range of technological and methodical approaches can be taken for tackling each of these issues, including recent advances and new challenges in the automatized analysis of task-related mental representation structures.

Indexed as

assistance systemshuman augmentationhuman enhancementmental representation structuresSDA-Msustainability

Identifiers

PMID36687906
PMCPMC9845569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.