ReviewWearable technologies2023
Exoskeletons: A challenge for development.
Review in Wearable technologies, 2023. 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.
- Space Physiology and Technology: Adaptations, Countermeasures, and Opportunities for Wearable Systems.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- OpenSEA: a 3D printed planetary gear series elastic actuator for a compliant elbow joint exoskeleton.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2025Article
- Design, development, and evaluation of a novel shoulder phantom testbed for analyzing interaction forces and reachability of wearable exoskeletons.Wearable technologies · 2025Article
- Hearables: Bioelectronics technological challenges and opportunities.Wearable technologies · 2025Review
- Active, Actuated, and Assistive: a Scoping Review of Exoskeletons for the Hands and Wrists.Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal · 2024Article
- Evaluating the advantages of passive exoskeletons and recommendations for design improvements.Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineeringArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of exoskeletons is currently a lengthy process full of challenges. We are proposing a framework to accelerate the process and make the resulting exoskeletons more user-centered. The needed accomplishments in science are described in an effort to lay the foundation for future research projects. Since the early 2000s, exoskeletons have been discussed as an emerging technology in industrial, medical, or military applications. Those systems are designed to support people during manual tasks. At first, those systems lacked broad acceptance. Many models found their niches in ongoing developments and more diverse systems entering the market. There are still applications that are in dire need of such assistance. Due to the lack of experience with body-worn robotics, the development of such systems has been shaped by trial and error. The lack of legacy products results in longer development times. In this paper, a process to generate a framework is presented to display the required research to enable future exoskeleton designers. Owing to their proximity to the user's body, exoskeletons are highly complex systems that need sophisticated subsystems, such as kinematic, control, interaction design, or actuators, to be accepted by users. Due to the wide variety of fields and high user demands, a synchronized multidisciplinary effort is necessary. To achieve this, a process to develop a modular framework for exoskeleton design is proposed. It focuses on user- and use-case-centered solutions for matching kinematics, actuation, and control. To ensure the usefulness of the framework, an evaluation of the incorporated solutions is 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.