SynthesisPloS one2022
Does the fit of personal protective equipment affect functional performance? A systematic review across occupational domains.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- N95 filtering facepiece respirator fit assessment outcomes by gender, age, race, and facial hair in a community population sample.Annals of work exposures and health · 2026Article
- Extended Study on the Development of 3D-Printed Overlay Structures in Protective Gloves Using Ultrasonic and Contact Welding with Additional Fatigue Bending Tests.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Research on product design priority allocation based on user characteristics classification.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A New Approach to Implementing 3D-Printed Material Structures for Protective Gloves with the Use of Ultrasonic and Contact Welding Processes: A Preliminary Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The Effects of Torso-Borne Loads on Functional Movement Patterns.International journal of exercise science · 2024Article
- COVID-19: Masks do not influence neurocognitive performance during a shift at the emergency department.World journal of emergency medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) fit on functional performance across a range of occupational domains.
backgroundPPE introduces an ergonomic, human systems integration, and mass burden to the wearer, and these factors are thought to be amplified if PPE is ill-fitting. However, few studies have considered the role of fit (static, dynamic, and cognitive) when evaluating PPE-related performance detriments in occupational settings.
methodA systematic literature review was conducted to identify relevant studies, which were then critically appraised based on methodological quality and collated to compare key findings and present evidence-based recommendations for future research directions across a range of occupational domains.
results16 published studies met the inclusion criteria, 88% of which found that the fit of PPE had a statistically significant effect on occupational performance. Poorly sized PPE resulted in slower or increased reaction time; decreased range of motion or mobility; decreased endurance or tolerance; decreased pulmonary function; and altered muscle activation. Limited research met the inclusion criteria and those that did had risks of bias in methodology quality.
conclusionFuture research evaluating the effect of PPE on performance in occupational settings should aim to recruit a more representative population; consider sex as a covariate; quantify and evaluate PPE fit and performance when integrated with all relevant equipment items; include outcome measures related to all three categories of fit (static, dynamic, cognitive); and assess performance of operationally relevant tasks.
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.