Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft
Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and t...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Holloway, Catherine [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2015transfer abstract |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
7 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis - Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER, 2016, IE, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:48 ; year:2015 ; pages:167-173 ; extent:7 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV034452656 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV034452656 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230625200941.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 180603s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a GBVA2015006000022.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV034452656 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | |a 650 |a 600 | |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 650 |q DE-600 |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 600 |q DE-600 |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 333.7 |a 610 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 43.12 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 43.13 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 44.13 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Holloway, Catherine |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2015transfer abstract | |
| 300 | |a 7 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. | ||
| 520 | |a Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Disability |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Accessibility |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Wheelchair |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Aircraft boarding |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Attendant propelled wheelchairs |2 Elsevier | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Thoreau, Roselle |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Petit, Esther |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Tyler, Nick |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier Science |a Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER |t Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis |d 2016 |d IE |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV013868330 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:48 |g year:2015 |g pages:167-173 |g extent:7 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OPC-GGO | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 43.12 |j Umweltchemie |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 43.13 |j Umwelttoxikologie |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.13 |j Medizinische Ökologie |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 48 |j 2015 |h 167-173 |g 7 | ||
| 953 | |2 045F |a 650 | ||
| author_variant |
c h ch |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
hollowaycatherinethoreaurosellepetitesth:2015----:ienfreeurdoatnatbadnwelhi |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2015transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
43.12 43.13 44.13 |
| publishDate |
2015 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 doi GBVA2015006000022.pica (DE-627)ELV034452656 (ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 600 650 DE-600 600 DE-600 610 VZ 333.7 610 VZ 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 bkl Holloway, Catherine verfasserin aut Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft 2015transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs Elsevier Thoreau, Roselle oth Petit, Esther oth Tyler, Nick oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis 2016 IE Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV013868330 volume:48 year:2015 pages:167-173 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_70 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ 43.13 Umwelttoxikologie VZ 44.13 Medizinische Ökologie VZ AR 48 2015 167-173 7 045F 650 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 doi GBVA2015006000022.pica (DE-627)ELV034452656 (ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 600 650 DE-600 600 DE-600 610 VZ 333.7 610 VZ 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 bkl Holloway, Catherine verfasserin aut Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft 2015transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs Elsevier Thoreau, Roselle oth Petit, Esther oth Tyler, Nick oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis 2016 IE Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV013868330 volume:48 year:2015 pages:167-173 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_70 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ 43.13 Umwelttoxikologie VZ 44.13 Medizinische Ökologie VZ AR 48 2015 167-173 7 045F 650 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 doi GBVA2015006000022.pica (DE-627)ELV034452656 (ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 600 650 DE-600 600 DE-600 610 VZ 333.7 610 VZ 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 bkl Holloway, Catherine verfasserin aut Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft 2015transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs Elsevier Thoreau, Roselle oth Petit, Esther oth Tyler, Nick oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis 2016 IE Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV013868330 volume:48 year:2015 pages:167-173 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_70 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ 43.13 Umwelttoxikologie VZ 44.13 Medizinische Ökologie VZ AR 48 2015 167-173 7 045F 650 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 doi GBVA2015006000022.pica (DE-627)ELV034452656 (ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 600 650 DE-600 600 DE-600 610 VZ 333.7 610 VZ 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 bkl Holloway, Catherine verfasserin aut Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft 2015transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs Elsevier Thoreau, Roselle oth Petit, Esther oth Tyler, Nick oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis 2016 IE Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV013868330 volume:48 year:2015 pages:167-173 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_70 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ 43.13 Umwelttoxikologie VZ 44.13 Medizinische Ökologie VZ AR 48 2015 167-173 7 045F 650 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 doi GBVA2015006000022.pica (DE-627)ELV034452656 (ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 600 650 DE-600 600 DE-600 610 VZ 333.7 610 VZ 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 bkl Holloway, Catherine verfasserin aut Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft 2015transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs Elsevier Thoreau, Roselle oth Petit, Esther oth Tyler, Nick oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis 2016 IE Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV013868330 volume:48 year:2015 pages:167-173 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_70 43.12 Umweltchemie VZ 43.13 Umwelttoxikologie VZ 44.13 Medizinische Ökologie VZ AR 48 2015 167-173 7 045F 650 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:48 year:2015 pages:167-173 extent:7 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:48 year:2015 pages:167-173 extent:7 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Umweltchemie Umwelttoxikologie Medizinische Ökologie |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Disability Accessibility Wheelchair Aircraft boarding Attendant propelled wheelchairs |
| dewey-raw |
650 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Holloway, Catherine @@aut@@ Thoreau, Roselle @@oth@@ Petit, Esther @@oth@@ Tyler, Nick @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2015-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV013868330 |
| dewey-sort |
3650 |
| id |
ELV034452656 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV034452656</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625200941.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2015006000022.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV034452656</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">650</subfield><subfield code="a">600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">650</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">600</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">43.13</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.13</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Holloway, Catherine</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Disability</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Accessibility</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Wheelchair</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Aircraft boarding</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Attendant propelled wheelchairs</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Thoreau, Roselle</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Petit, Esther</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tyler, Nick</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">2016</subfield><subfield code="d">IE</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV013868330</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:48</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:167-173</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-GGO</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="j">Umweltchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">43.13</subfield><subfield code="j">Umwelttoxikologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.13</subfield><subfield code="j">Medizinische Ökologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">48</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="h">167-173</subfield><subfield code="g">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">650</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Holloway, Catherine |
| spellingShingle |
Holloway, Catherine ddc 650 ddc 600 ddc 610 ddc 333.7 bkl 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 Elsevier Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft |
| authorStr |
Holloway, Catherine |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV013868330 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
650 - Management & auxiliary services 600 - Technology 610 - Medicine & health 333 - Economics of land & energy |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
650 600 650 DE-600 600 DE-600 610 VZ 333.7 610 VZ 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 bkl Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs Elsevier |
| topic |
ddc 650 ddc 600 ddc 610 ddc 333.7 bkl 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 Elsevier Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 650 ddc 600 ddc 610 ddc 333.7 bkl 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 Elsevier Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs |
| topic_browse |
ddc 650 ddc 600 ddc 610 ddc 333.7 bkl 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 Elsevier Disability Elsevier Accessibility Elsevier Wheelchair Elsevier Aircraft boarding Elsevier Attendant propelled wheelchairs |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
r t rt e p ep n t nt |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV013868330 |
| dewey-tens |
650 - Management & public relations 600 - Technology 610 - Medicine & health 330 - Economics |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV013868330 |
| title |
Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV034452656 (ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2 |
| title_full |
Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft |
| author_sort |
Holloway, Catherine |
| journal |
Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis |
| journalStr |
Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology 300 - Social sciences |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2015 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
167 |
| author_browse |
Holloway, Catherine |
| container_volume |
48 |
| physical |
7 |
| class |
650 600 650 DE-600 600 DE-600 610 VZ 333.7 610 VZ 43.12 bkl 43.13 bkl 44.13 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Holloway, Catherine |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 |
| dewey-full |
650 600 610 333.7 |
| title_sort |
time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft |
| title_auth |
Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft |
| abstract |
Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. |
| abstractGer |
Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-GGO GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_70 |
| title_short |
Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Thoreau, Roselle Petit, Esther Tyler, Nick |
| author2Str |
Thoreau, Roselle Petit, Esther Tyler, Nick |
| ppnlink |
ELV013868330 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T21:09:40.334Z |
| _version_ |
1803865481896001536 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV034452656</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625200941.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2015006000022.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV034452656</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0169-8141(15)00054-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">650</subfield><subfield code="a">600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">650</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">600</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">43.13</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.13</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Holloway, Catherine</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ensuring equal opportunity to all transport modes, including air travel, allows disabled people the same freedom of travel available to the rest of the population. However, boarding of wheelchair users onto airplanes is physically demanding for attendant airline or airport personal whom assist and time consuming and costly for airlines. This paper presents a comparison between two methods of boarding wheelchair users, measuring the forces required and the duration taken. Participants were asked to act as attendants and to board weighted wheelchairs onto simulated aircraft vestibules using two different manoeuvre methods (“going forwards” and “going backwards”), with two different loadings (“light” and “heavy”) in two different access scenarios (“level access” and “sloped access”) between the jet-way/scissor-lift and the aircraft. The results reveal that the “going backwards” technique is a slightly faster manoeuvre method but no difference in the forces required exist between the two methods. The weight of the wheelchair affected the forces required to complete the boarding and exceeded health and safety guidelines for attendants. Reducing the height of the step between the aircraft and the jet-way or scissor-lift is recommended.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Disability</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Accessibility</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Wheelchair</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Aircraft boarding</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Attendant propelled wheelchairs</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Thoreau, Roselle</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Petit, Esther</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tyler, Nick</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Huang, Kathie P. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Cardiovascular risk in patients with alopecia areata (AA): A propensity-matched retrospective analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">2016</subfield><subfield code="d">IE</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV013868330</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:48</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:167-173</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-GGO</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">43.12</subfield><subfield code="j">Umweltchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">43.13</subfield><subfield code="j">Umwelttoxikologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.13</subfield><subfield code="j">Medizinische Ökologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">48</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="h">167-173</subfield><subfield code="g">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">650</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.402231 |