ArticleScientific reports2025
An innovative approach to welding robot operator reliability analysis using extended TESEO and HEART methods.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The paper presents a comprehensive identification and assessment of occupational hazards related to the operation of robotic welding systems. New technology fundamentally improves quality and accuracy of welds, especially precise narrow seams connecting thin sheets or profiles. The paper draws attention to typical occupational hazards occurring in the workplace, as well as those resulting from the use of robotic welding devices. Risk assessment was performed using the commonly used RISK SCORE method. Moreover, as part of our own research, the employee's reliability levels were determined by determining the probability of making a mistake. The human factor reliability study was carried out using HRA (Human Reliability Analysis) methods. The classic TESEO and HEART approaches have been expanded to include additional factors, such as human-machine interface (HMI), cognitive load, quality of documentation and procedures, and task ambiguity. This addition addresses a significant methodological gap in classic HRA analyses, which have so far overlooked these key aspects that influence the effectiveness and safety of human-robot interactions.
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.