These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1633787)
1. Psychophysical capacity of industrial workers for lifting symmetrical and asymmetrical loads symmetrically and asymmetrically for 8 h work shifts. Mital A Ergonomics; 1992; 35(7-8):745-54. PubMed ID: 1633787 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Maximum weights of asymmetrical loads acceptable to industrial workers for symmetrical manual lifting. Mital A Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1987 Jun; 48(6):539-44. PubMed ID: 3618467 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Psychophysical and physiological responses to lifting symmetrical and asymmetrical loads symmetrically and asymmetrically. Mital A; Fard HF Ergonomics; 1986 Oct; 29(10):1263-72. PubMed ID: 3780664 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Spine loading as a function of lift frequency, exposure duration, and work experience. Marras WS; Parakkat J; Chany AM; Yang G; Burr D; Lavender SA Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2006 May; 21(4):345-52. PubMed ID: 16310299 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effects of container size, frequency and extended horizontal reach on maximum acceptable weights of lifting for female industrial workers. Ciriello VM Appl Ergon; 2007 Jan; 38(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 16616883 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Older females in the workforce - the effects of age on psychophysical estimates of maximum acceptable lifting loads. Chen JA; Dickerson CR; Wells RP; Laing AC Ergonomics; 2017 Dec; 60(12):1708-1717. PubMed ID: 28554263 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Maximum acceptable forces of dynamic pushing: comparison of two techniques. Ciriello VM; McGorry RW; Martin SE; Bezverkhny IB Ergonomics; 1999 Jan; 42(1):32-9. PubMed ID: 9973870 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The load on the lumbar spine during asymmetrical bi-manual materials handling. Jäger M; Luttmann A Ergonomics; 1992; 35(7-8):783-805. PubMed ID: 1633789 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. What is a demanding lifting job for manual handling workers in Hong Kong? Yeung SS; Genaidy AM; Deddens J; Leung PC Ergonomics; 2003 May; 46(6):574-97. PubMed ID: 12745689 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Discriminability of load heaviness: implications for the psychophysical approach to manual lifting. Karwowski W; Shumate C; Yates JW; Pongpatana N Ergonomics; 1992; 35(7-8):729-44. PubMed ID: 1633786 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A psychophysical approach to determine the frequency and duration of work-rest schedules for manual handling operations. Genaidy AM; al-Rayes S Ergonomics; 1993 May; 36(5):509-18. PubMed ID: 8500472 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Beyond psychophysics: the need for a cognitive engineering approach to setting limits in manual lifting tasks. Karwowski W; Lee W; Jamaldin B; Gaddie P; Jang RL; Alqesaimi KK Ergonomics; 1999 Jan; 42(1):40-60. PubMed ID: 9973871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Maximum acceptable work loads for repetitive lifting tasks. An experimental evaluation of psychophysical criteria. Gamberale F Scand J Work Environ Health; 1988; 14 Suppl 1():85-7. PubMed ID: 3393892 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Static and dynamic lifting strength at different reach distances in symmetrical and asymmetrical planes. Kumar S; Garand D Ergonomics; 1992; 35(7-8):861-80. PubMed ID: 1633793 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Predicint lifting capacity. Ayoub MM; Dryden R; McDaniel J; Knipfer R; Dixon D Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1979 Dec; 40(12):1075-84. PubMed ID: 539547 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Secular changes in psychophysically determined maximum acceptable weights and forces over 20 years for male industrial workers. Ciriello VM; Dempsey PG; Maikala RV; O'Brien NV Ergonomics; 2008 May; 51(5):593-601. PubMed ID: 18432440 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]