Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40309927›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of industrial medicine2025

Industrial Robotics and the Future of Work.

John Howard, Vladimir Murashov, Gary Roth, Christopher Wendt, Jacob Carr, Marvin Cheng, Scott Earnest, K C Elliott, Emily Haas, Ci-Jyun Liang and 6 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of industrial medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Robot-Related Workers' Compensation Claims in Ohio, 2001-2020.American journal of industrial medicine · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

John HowardNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1875-3516
Vladimir MurashovNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Gary RothOffice of Performance, Planning and Evaluation, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Christopher WendtDivision of Science Integration, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Jacob CarrPittsburgh Mining Research Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Marvin ChengDivision of Safety Research, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
Scott EarnestOffice of Construction Safety and Health, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
K C ElliottOffice of Agricultural Safety and Health, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4054-573X
Emily HaasDivision of Safety Research, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5128-470X
Ci-Jyun LiangDepartment of Civil Engineering, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0213-8471
Gretchen PeteryDivision of Science Integration, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Jennifer RagsdaleDivision of Science Integration, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Christopher ReidBoeing Corporation, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Peregrin SpielholzEnvironmental Health and Safety Engineering, Boeing Corporation, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Douglas TroutOffice of Construction Safety and Health, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Divya SrinivasanDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Starting in the 1970s with robots that were physically isolated from contact with their human co-workers, robots now collaborate with human workers towards a common task goal in a shared workspace. This type of robotic device represents a new era of workplace automation. Industrial robotics is rapidly evolving due to advances in sensor technology, artificial intelligence (AI), wireless communications, mechanical engineering, and materials science. While these new robotic devices are used mainly in manufacturing and warehousing, human-robot collaboration is now seen across multiple goods-producing and service-delivery industry sectors. Assessing and controlling the risks of human-robot collaboration is a critical challenge for occupational safety and health research and practice as industrial robotics becomes a pervasive feature of the future of work. Understanding the physical, psychosocial, work organization, and cybersecurity risks associated with the increasing use of robotic technologies is critical to ensuring the safe development and implementation of industrial robotics. This commentary provides a brief review of the uses of robotic technologies across selected industry sectors; the risks of current and future industrial robotic applications for worker and employer alike; strategies for integrating human-robot collaboration into a health and safety management system; and the role of robotic safety standards in the future of work.

Indexed as

IndustryOccupational HealthRoboticsArtificial IntelligenceHumansWorkplacecobotsfuture of workhuman‐robot collaborationriskstandards

Identifiers

PMID40309927
PMCPMC13271085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.