ArticleWearable technologies2022
Exoworkathlon: A prospective study approach for the evaluation of industrial exoskeletons.
Article in Wearable technologies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Intention Prediction for Active Upper-Limb Exoskeletons in Industrial Applications: A Systematic Literature Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Quantification of the Mechanical Properties in the Human-Exoskeleton Upper Arm Interface During Overhead Work Postures in Healthy Young Adults.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Mapping the evidence on occupational exoskeleton use for the workforce in healthcare, social care, and industry: A systematic scoping review.Wearable technologies · 2025Review
- From the idea to the user: a pragmatic multifaceted approach to testing occupational exoskeletons.Wearable technologies · 2025Article
- Methodology for the knowledge-based selection of occupational exoskeletons.Production engineering : research and development · 2025Article
- Current State, Needs, and Opportunities for Wearable Robots in Military Medical Rehabilitation and Force Protection.Actuators · 2024Article
- Dynamic and Static Assistive Strategies for a Tailored Occupational Back-Support Exoskeleton: Assessment on Real Tasks Carried Out by Railway Workers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Closed-Chain Inverse Dynamics for the Biomechanical Analysis of Manual Material Handling Tasks through a Deep Learning Assisted Wearable Sensor Network.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Influence of exoskeleton use on welding quality during a simulated welding task.Wearable technologies · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Industrial exoskeletons have recently gained importance as ergonomic interventions for physically demanding work activities. The growing demand for exoskeletons is leading to a need for new knowledge on the effectiveness of these systems. The Exoworkathlon, as a prospective study approach, aims to assess exoskeletons in realistic use cases and to evaluate them neutrally in their entirety. For this purpose, a first set of four realistic Parcours was developed with experts from relevant industries, the German Social Accident Insurance, and the Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. In addition, a set of ratings was defined to assess subjective user feedback, work quality, and objective physiological parameters. Exoworkathlon aims to bring together developers, researchers, and end-users, strengthen collaborative exchanges, and promote a platform for the prospective holistic data collection for exoskeleton evaluation. In this article, the focus is on the background and methodology of Exoworkathlon.
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.