ReviewAnnals of occupational and environmental medicine2026
Factors associated with work-related musculoskeletal disorders using machine learning approaches: a systematic review.
Review in Annals of occupational and environmental medicine, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWork-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs) remain a major cause of occupational disability and productivity loss worldwide. Traditional statistical methods have identified numerous associated factors; however, they often struggle to capture complex non-linear relationships and interactions across multiple domains of risk. Machine learning (ML) offers an alternative analytical approach for modelling such multidimensional relationships.
methodsFollowing the PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420250605234), literature searches were conducted in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed for studies published between 2020 and 2025. Eligible studies applied ML methods to identify factors associated with WRMSDs using cross-sectional study designs. Included studies were appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies.
resultsTen studies met the inclusion criteria, representing workers from healthcare, transport, manufacturing, and service sectors across Asia, Africa, and Europe. Frequently applied ML algorithms included random forest, support vector machine, and artificial neural networks, demonstrating strong internal discriminative performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.80-0.99), although the absence of external validation in several studies suggests a potential risk of overfitting. Commonly identified factors included age, sex, awkward posture, vibration exposure, prolonged working hours, stress, and burnout. Psychosocial factors, including post-traumatic stress disorder, job stress, and depression, were ranked among the most influential predictors within ML models.
conclusionsML models demonstrate strong capability in discriminating WRMSDs risk and identifying multidimensional risk factors compared with traditional statistical approaches. These models highlight complex interrelationships between ergonomic and psychosocial exposures. Future research should incorporate external validation, objective exposure measurements, and standardized ML reporting frameworks to enhance methodological transparency and generalizability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.