SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Musculoskeletal disorders among taxi drivers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Musculoskeletal disorders among bank workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Pooled it
- Musculoskeletal health and mental well-being of occupational two-wheeler delivery drivers from Mumbai metropolitan region.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Assessing the Link Between Physical Activity and Musculoskeletal Disorders in Taxi Drivers: A Comparison of Accelerometry and Self-Report Measures.Musculoskeletal care · 2026Observational
- Visual-Inertial Fusion Framework for Isolating Seated Human-Body Vibration in Dynamic Vehicular Environments.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Association between musculoskeletal disorders and health-related quality of life in Chilean and Spanish taxi drivers.AIMS public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTaxi drivers, as professional drivers, encounter numerous ergonomic risk factors related to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) because of the demands of their jobs. This study conducted as a systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the prevalence of MSDs among taxi drivers. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe present study followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and its protocol was registered in the international prospective register of systematic review (PROSPERO) under the code CRD42024509258. Searches were carried out using various databases, such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, SID, ISC, and Google Scholar, with no time restrictions until February 7th, 2024. A random effects model was utilized for meta-analysis, and the I
resultsAfter the initial search, 1606 articles were extracted from the reviewed sources. Following screening, study selection, and quality evaluation, a total of 11 studies were chosen for meta-analysis, involving 5277 taxi drivers. Based on the results of the meta-analysis, the highest prevalence of MSDs among taxi drivers was related to the lower back region (53.87% (95% CI:40.89-66.84, I
conclusionBased on the findings of this study, the prevalence of MSDs among taxi drivers is relatively high, and specific risk factors may contribute to the development of these disorders. Therefore, to prevent the occurrence of MSDs among taxi drivers, it is advisable to implement essential measures concerning the development of training programs, ergonomic interventions, and evaluation of the work environment.
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.