ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Exoskeletons: Contribution to Occupational Health and Safety.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating Exoskeletons for WMSD Prevention: A Systematic Review of Applications and Ergonomic Approach in Occupational Settings.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Pooled it
- Technology-Driven Ergonomics: A Narrative Review of Innovative Strategies for Preventing Musculoskeletal Disorders in Modern Work Environments.Health science reports · 2026Article
- From Wearable Sensor Networks to Markerless Motion Capture for Instrumental-Based Biomechanical Risk Assessment in Lifting Activities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Innovative Technologies to Improve Occupational Safety in Mining and Construction Industries-Part II.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Adverse Effects Due to the Use of Upper Limbs Exoskeletons in the Work Environment: A Scoping Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Exoskeleton technology in nursing practice: assessing effectiveness, usability, and impact on nurses' quality of work life, a narrative review.BMC nursing · 2024Review
- Biosignal-integrated robotic systems with emerging trends in visual interfaces: A systematic review.Biophysics reviews · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This review aims to characterize the current landscape of exoskeletons designed to promote medical care and occupational safety in industrial settings. Extensive exploration of scientific databases spanning industries, health, and medicine informs the classification of exoskeletons according to their distinctive attributes and specific footholds on the human physique. Within the scope of this review, a comprehensive analysis is presented, contextualizing the integration of exoskeletons based on different work activities. The reviewers extracted the most relevant articles published between 2008 and 2023 from IEEE, Proquest, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, and other databases. In this review, the PRISMA-ScR checklist was used, and a Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.642 was applied, implying moderate agreement among the reviewers; 75 primary studies were extracted from a total of 344. The future of exoskeletons in contributing to occupational health and safety will depend on continued collaboration between researchers, designers, healthcare professionals, and industries. With the continued development of technologies and an increasing understanding of how these devices interact with the human body, exoskeletons will likely remain valuable for improving working conditions and safety in various work environments.
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.