ArticleScientific reports2024
Validation of computer vision-based ergonomic risk assessment tools for real manufacturing environments.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Human-centered industry 5.0 technologies for occupational risk reduction: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Process Phase Estimation and Deviation Detection for Manual Soldering Based on Motion Analysis.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- [Transformation of Epidemiology in the Age of Artificial Intelligence].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Article
- Article
- Towards Maintenance 5.0: Resilience-Based Maintenance in AI-Driven Sustainable and Human-Centric Industrial Systems.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Lightweight Vision Transformer for Frame-Level Ergonomic Posture Classification in Industrial Workflows.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
This study contributes to understanding semi-automated ergonomic risk assessments in industrial manufacturing environments, proposing a practical tool for enhancing worker safety and operational efficiency. In the Industry 5.0 era, the human-centric approach in manufacturing is crucial, especially considering the aging workforce and the dynamic nature of the entire modern industrial sector, today integrating digital technology, automation, and sustainable practices to enhance productivity and environmental responsibility. This approach aims to adapt work conditions to individual capabilities, addressing the high incidence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). The traditional, subjective methods of ergonomic assessment are inadequate for dynamic settings, highlighting the need for affordable, automatic tools for continuous monitoring of workers' postures to evaluate ergonomic risks effectively during tasks. To enable this perspective, 2D RGB Motion Capture (MoCap) systems based on computer vision currently seem the technologies of choice, given their low intrusiveness, cost, and implementation effort. However, the reliability and applicability of these systems in the dynamic and varied manufacturing environment remain uncertain. This research benchmarks various literature proposed MoCap tools and examines the viability of MoCap systems for ergonomic risk assessments in Industry 5.0 by exploiting one of the benchmarked semi-automated, low-cost and non-intrusive 2D RGB MoCap system, capable of continuously monitoring and analysing workers' postures. By conducting experiments across varied manufacturing environments, this research evaluates the system's effectiveness in assessing ergonomic risks and its adaptability to different production lines. Results reveal that the accuracy of risk assessments varies by specific environmental conditions and workstation setups. Although these systems are not yet optimized for expert-level risk certification, they offer significant potential for enhancing workplace safety and efficiency by providing continuous posture monitoring. Future improvements could explore advanced computational techniques like machine learning to refine ergonomic assessments further.
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.