4.4 Letter

Letter regarding 'Comparison between low-cost marker-less and high-end marker-based motion capture systems for the computer-aided assessment of working ergonomics' by Patrizi et al. and research reproducibility

Journal

ERGONOMICS
Volume 60, Issue 4, Pages 597-598

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1136700

Keywords

Ergonomics tools and methods; software design and evaluation; task analysis; musculoskeletal disorders

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The reporting of research in a manner that allows reproduction in subsequent investigations is important for scientific progress. Several details of the recent study by Patrizi et al., Comparison between low-cost marker-less and high-end marker-based motion capture systems for the computer-aided assessment of working ergonomics', are absent from the published manuscript and make reproduction of findings impossible. As new and complex technologies with great promise for ergonomics develop, new but surmountable challenges for reporting investigations using these technologies in a reproducible manner arise.Practitioner Summary: As with traditional methods, scientific reporting of new and complex ergonomics technologies should be performed in a manner that allows reproduction in subsequent investigations and supports scientific advancement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available