| Title |
Auditory display as feedback for a novel eye-tracking system for sterile operating room interaction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11548-017-1677-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Black, Michael Unger, Nele Fischer, Ron Kikinis, Horst Hahn, Thomas Neumuth, Bernhard Glaser |
| Abstract |
The growing number of technical systems in the operating room has increased attention on developing touchless interaction methods for sterile conditions. However, touchless interaction paradigms lack the tactile feedback found in common input devices such as mice and keyboards. We propose a novel touchless eye-tracking interaction system with auditory display as a feedback method for completing typical operating room tasks. Auditory display provides feedback concerning the selected input into the eye-tracking system as well as a confirmation of the system response. An eye-tracking system with a novel auditory display using both earcons and parameter-mapping sonification was developed to allow touchless interaction for six typical scrub nurse tasks. An evaluation with novice participants compared auditory display with visual display with respect to reaction time and a series of subjective measures. When using auditory display to substitute for the lost tactile feedback during eye-tracking interaction, participants exhibit reduced reaction time compared to using visual-only display. In addition, the auditory feedback led to lower subjective workload and higher usefulness and system acceptance ratings. Due to the absence of tactile feedback for eye-tracking and other touchless interaction methods, auditory display is shown to be a useful and necessary addition to new interaction concepts for the sterile operating room, reducing reaction times while improving subjective measures, including usefulness, user satisfaction, and cognitive workload. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 3% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 23 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 9 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 26 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,957,541
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#472
of 857 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,287
of 328,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 857 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.