Unequal assistance? A systematic review of demographic representation and outcome differences in exoskeleton studies

Occupational exoskeletons are increasingly adopted to mitigate work-related physical demands, yet demographic variability in effectiveness remains unclear. This systematic review evaluated demographic reporting in arm- and back-support exoskeleton (ASE/BSE) studies and synthesized evidence on demographic-related outcome differences in response to exoskeleton-use. A total of 191 articles (2019-2024) were analyzed for age, sex, race/ethnicity, anthropometry, device type, and setting. Twenty-five studies incorporated demographic variables in statistical analysis; 24 enabled a best-evidence synthesis of sex-specific effects on muscle activity, kinematics, and subjective responses. Quality was appraised using a modified Downs and Black tool. Most studies were laboratory-based with passive devices, and predominantly young male (∼78%) participants; none reported race/ethnicity, and anthropometric diversity was limited. While methodological quality was generally high, sample representativeness and justification were often lacking. Moderate evidence indicated larger reductions in trunk extensor activity for females using BSEs, while evidence for other demographic effects was insufficient. The limited demographic inclusivity of exoskeleton research limits generalizability. Future research should prioritize diverse recruitment and explore how demographic factors influence device efficacy to ensure equitable design and implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Ergonomics
Published
2026-05-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2026.104808
Primary Topic
Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unequal assistance? A systematic review of demographic representation and outcome differences in exoskeleton studies

Zeinab Kazemi, Divya Srinivasan, Jangho Park
Applied Ergonomics
Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
article

Unequal assistance? A systematic review of demographic representation and outcome differences in exoskeleton studies

Zeinab Kazemi, Divya Srinivasan, Jangho Park
article en

Abstract

Occupational exoskeletons are increasingly adopted to mitigate work-related physical demands, yet demographic variability in effectiveness remains unclear. This systematic review evaluated demographic reporting in arm- and back-support exoskeleton (ASE/BSE) studies and synthesized evidence on demographic-related outcome differences in response to exoskeleton-use. A total of 191 articles (2019-2024) were analyzed for age, sex, race/ethnicity, anthropometry, device type, and setting. Twenty-five studies incorporated demographic variables in statistical analysis; 24 enabled a best-evidence synthesis of sex-specific effects on muscle activity, kinematics, and subjective responses. Quality was appraised using a modified Downs and Black tool. Most studies were laboratory-based with passive devices, and predominantly young male (∼78%) participants; none reported race/ethnicity, and anthropometric diversity was limited. While methodological quality was generally high, sample representativeness and justification were often lacking. Moderate evidence indicated larger reductions in trunk extensor activity for females using BSEs, while evidence for other demographic effects was insufficient. The limited demographic inclusivity of exoskeleton research limits generalizability. Future research should prioritize diverse recruitment and explore how demographic factors influence device efficacy to ensure equitable design and implementation.

Applied ErgonomicsVol. 137
Clemson University (US), Texas A&M University (US)
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.