ReviewJournal of intelligent & robotic systems2022
A Systematic Review of Low-Cost Actuator Implementations for Lower-Limb Exoskeletons: a Technical and Financial Perspective.
Review in Journal of intelligent & robotic systems, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Flexible exoskeleton-assisted training enhances lower limb motor function after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Research on Control Strategy of Lower Limb Exoskeleton Robots: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Patent Review of Lower Limb Rehabilitation Robotic Systems by Sensors and Actuation Systems Used.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
A common issue with many commercial rehabilitative exoskeletons and orthoses are that they can be prohibitively expensive for an average individual to afford without additional financial support. Due to this a user may have limited to the usage of such devices within set rehabilitation sessions as opposed to a continual usage. The purpose of this review is therefore to find which actuator implementations would be most suitable for a simplistic, low-cost powered orthoses capable of assisting those with pathologic gait disorders by collating literature from Web of Science, Scopus, and Grey Literature. In this systematic review paper 127 papers were selected from these databases via the PRISMA guidelines, with the financial costs of 25 actuators discovered with 11 distinct actuator groups identified. The review paper will consider a variety of actuator implementations used in existing lower-limb exoskeletons that are specifically designed for the purpose of rehabilitating or aiding those with conditions inhibiting natural movement abilities, such as electric motors, hydraulics, pneumatics, cable-driven actuators, and compliant actuators. Key attributes such as technical simplicity, financial cost, power efficiency, size limitations, accuracy, and reliability are compared for all actuator groups. Statistical findings show that rotary electric motors (which are the most common actuator type within collated literature) and compliant actuators (such as elastic and springs) would be the most suitable actuators for a low-cost implementation. From these results, a possible actuator design will be proposed making use of both rotary electric motors and compliant actuators. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10846-022-01695-0.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.