ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
A comparative study of biomechanical assessments in laboratory and field settings for manual material handling tasks using extractor tools and exoskeletons.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. 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.
- Acceptance of an upper body exoskeleton for occupational tasks among soldiers.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Assessing Effectiveness of Passive Exoskeletons and Tool Selection on Ergonomic Safety in Manhole Cover Removal.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of 2 Interventions on the Acceptability and Usability of a Sensing Glove for Measuring Force-Time Characteristics of Chiropractic Spinal Manipulative Therapy: A Crossover Study.Journal of chiropractic medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To enhance physical capabilities of workers who regularly perform physically demanding tasks involving heavy lifting and awkward postures, various tools and occupational exoskeletons can be used. Most of the studies aiming to explore the efficiency of these tools and exoskeletons have been performed in confined and controlled laboratory spaces, which do not represent the real-world work environment. This study aimed to compare the outcome of biomechanical assessment of using a back support exoskeleton and assistive tools (Lever and Jake) in the procedure of a high demanding manual material handling task versus the results found by performing the same task in a laboratory. Ten able-bodied participants and ten able-bodied utility workers performed the same manhole removal task in-lab and in-field, respectively, with the aid of an exoskeleton and Lever and Jake tools. Muscle activity and Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) scores were recorded using surface electromyography and inertial measurement units, respectively and compared between in-lab and in-field trials. The field experiments indicated significant differences (
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.