ArticlePloS one2023
Interdisciplinary evaluation of a robot physically collaborating with workers.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Wearable Sensor Networks to Markerless Motion Capture for Instrumental-Based Biomechanical Risk Assessment in Lifting Activities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Impact of Human-Robot Collaboration Levels on Postural Stability During Working Tasks Performed While Standing: Experimental Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Adaptive Lifting Index (Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Collaborative Robots-CoBots-are emerging as a promising technological aid for workers. To date, most CoBots merely share their workspace or collaborate without contact, with their human partners. We claim that robots would be much more beneficial if they physically collaborated with the worker, on high payload tasks. To move high payloads, while remaining safe, the robot should use two or more lightweight arms. In this work, we address the following question: to what extent can robots help workers in physical human-robot collaboration tasks? To find an answer, we have gathered an interdisciplinary group, spanning from an industrial end user to cognitive ergonomists, and including biomechanicians and roboticists. We drew inspiration from an industrial process realized repetitively by workers of the SME HANKAMP (Netherlands). Eleven participants replicated the process, without and with the help of a robot. During the task, we monitored the participants' biomechanical activity. After the task, the participants completed a survey with usability and acceptability measures; seven workers of the SME completed the same survey. The results of our research are the following. First, by applying-for the first time in collaborative robotics-Potvin's method, we show that the robot substantially reduces the participants' muscular effort. Second: we design and present an unprecedented method for measuring the robot reliability and reproducibility in collaborative scenarios. Third: by correlating the worker's effort with the power measured by the robot, we show that the two agents act in energetic synergy. Fourth: the participant's increasing level of experience with robots shifts his/her focus from the robot's overall functionality towards finer expectations. Last but not least: workers and participants are willing to work with the robot and think it is useful.
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.