Trial reportScientific reports2026
Influence of a passive shoulder exoskeleton on drilling performance in women- a cross-sectional study.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are common, especially among women performing repetitive overhead tasks. In a randomized 2 × 2 crossover study with 14 female participants, we investigated the effects of a passive upper-body exoskeleton during an overhead precision task, involving the tightening of 20 bolts into a sensor-based workstation, while muscle activation, task performance, and usability were assessed. The results showed significant reduced M. Trapezius muscle activations during arm lowering (p = .041, 73%), and lower target accuracy (p < .001, 100%) when using the exoskeleton. Subjective strain in the shoulders was significantly lower when using the exoskeleton (p = .035, 15%). The usability was rated as "unacceptable", with users criticizing the complexity and learning effort. While the exoskeleton reduced muscle load, its mechanical limitations impaired precision and usability, especially for women. These results highlight the importance of sex-specific, ergonomic, and adaptive designs to improve exoskeleton effectiveness and acceptance.
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.