ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Review of Potential Exoskeletons for the Prevention of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Agriculture.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing postural loads and musculoskeletal disorders in saffron harvesters: a prospective repeated-measures observational study using an agricultural-specific tool.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- Electromyography Signal Acquisition, Filtering, and Data Analysis for Exoskeleton Development.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Effect of Wearable Exoskeleton Robots on Muscle Activation and Gait Parameters on a Treadmill: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Wearable Sensors in Industrial Ergonomics: Enhancing Safety and Productivity in Industry 4.0.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Keeogo Exoskeleton-Assisted Rehabilitation on Functional Mobility in Older Adults with Multimorbidity: A Single-Arm Pilot Study.International journal of general 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exoskeletons possess a high potential for assisting the human workforce while eliminating or reducing the risk of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs). However, their usage in agricultural work, where there is a plethora of reported WMSD cases, seems limited. Since agricultural tasks are complex and performed in harsh environments, developing novel exoskeleton-based solutions could be challenging. However, commercial exoskeletons are already being used in various other industries, such as logistics, military, medicine, and manufacturing. Thus, it is expected that those existing exoskeleton solutions could be applied to agricultural tasks. Nevertheless, prior to implementation, assessing the feasibility, efficacy, and necessary modifications for these exoskeletons is imperative to supporting agricultural activities prone to WMSDs. In this review, prevalent exoskeletons documented in scientific literature are identified, and their potential relevance to agricultural tasks with elevated WMSD risks is evaluated. The review further highlights and deliberates on exoskeletons that could be applicable in an agricultural context. This comprehensive examination serves as a foundational step towards the conceptualization and development of exoskeleton-based approaches tailored explicitly for agricultural tasks.
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.