Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 300

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology.

Open access
van der Beek, A J, Frings-Dresen, M H·1998·Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Abstract

In recent years several different methods have been developed to assess mechanical exposures, which are related to musculoskeletal disorders in ergonomic epidemiology. Each of these methods is capable of measuring one or more aspects of risk factors, but has drawbacks as well. Improper application of methods might result in biased exposure estimates, which has serious consequences for risk estimates arising from epidemiological studies. The aim of this paper was to systematically evaluate the usefulness of different measurement methods in terms of accuracy and applicability. Assessment of external exposure measures by subjective judgements (from experts or self reports from workers), observational methods (on site or afterwards from video recordings), and direct measurements methods (at work or during laboratory simulations) are discussed for each of the dimensions of exposure level, duration, and frequency. It is concluded that expert judgements and self reports give only limited insight into the occurrence of tasks and activities. Further information can be obtained from observations, which can best be combined with direct measurements of exposure to posture, movement, and exerted forces to achieve exposure profiles by occupational task. Internal exposures estimated by biomechanical modelling mostly consider the low back and require information on postures of the different body segments and exerted forces, completed with movement data in the case of dynamic models. Moreover, electromyography (EMG) and measurements of intra-abdominal pressure might be used for this purpose. Both biomechanical models and EMG are useful methods to assess internal exposure, but biomechanical models should not be restricted to the level of compressive forces on the lower back. Finally, current problems and future directions in measurement strategies and methods are discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/oem.55.5.291

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Cited by

See all 300

Metadata

Authors
van der Beek, A. J., & Frings-Dresen, M. H.
Venue
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1998-05
Volume
55
Issue
5
Pages
291-299
ISSN
  • 0007-1072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1351-0711
  • 1470-7926
OpenAlex
W2167755970
Cited by
300
References
37
FWCI
15.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/oem.55.5.291
The paper
van der Beek, A. J., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. (1998). Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.55.5.291

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.