ArticleWearable technologies2023
Objective and subjective evaluation of a passive low-back exoskeleton during simulated logistics tasks.
Article in Wearable technologies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Occupational Exoskeletons as a Technological Solution for Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review of Barriers and Facilitators for Sustainable Workplace Integration.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Pooled 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
- Effects on muscular activity and usability of soft active versus rigid passive back exoskeleton during symmetric lifting tasks.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Active back exosuits demonstrate positive usability perceptions that drive intention-to-use in the field among logistic warehouse workers.Applied ergonomics · 2025Article
- Passive and Active Exoskeleton Solutions: Sensors, Actuators, Applications, and Recent Trends.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Musculoskeletal disorders remain the most common work-related health problem in the European Union. The most common work-related musculoskeletal disorder reported by workers is backache, especially in the logistics sector. Thus, this article aims to evaluate the effects of a commercial passive low-back exoskeleton during simulated logistics tasks. Thirty participants were recruited for this study. Typical logistics tasks were simulated in a laboratory environment. Cross-over research design was utilized to assess the effects of the exoskeleton on heart rate, trunk inclination, trunk acceleration, throughput, and perceived exertion. Also, usability and acceptance were obtained using a custom questionnaire. We found mostly non-significant differences. Effects on throughput varied widely between workplaces. Usability ratings were poor and acceptance moderate. The study suggests that a holistic evaluation and implementation approach for industrial exoskeletons is necessary. Further, prior to exoskeleton implementation, workplace adaptation might be required.
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.