TY - JOUR
T1 - Digital tools for identifying work tasks in various occupations: A scoping review
AU - Ludvigsen, Tonje Pedersen
AU - Schiøler, Stine
AU - Rasmussen, Alma Lagerbon
AU - Seeberg, Karina Glies Vincents
AU - Gupta, Nidhi
AU - Wiggen, Øystein
AU - Jakobsen, Markus Due
PY - 2026/6
Y1 - 2026/6
N2 - This scoping review aimed to map peer-reviewed studies applying digital tools for automatically or semi-automatically mapping work tasks, including their type, location, duration, or worker identification. Following Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar (2014–2024). Forty-nine studies were included, most of which were of moderate quality, limited by small and unrepresentative samples and low user involvement. Studies covered diverse occupations, mainly construction (n = 20) and manufacturing (n = 16). The most common tools were sensor-based (n = 24), vision-based (n = 13), multimodal (hybrid) (n = 6), and localisation-based (n = 4). Audio- and interaction-based tools appeared in single studies. Many tools captured task duration, some also worker identity, and fewer captured task location. These findings highlight both the potential and the current limitations of digital tools for mapping work tasks, underscoring the need for methodological development and real-world application in occupational research and practice. The protocol was preregistered in the Open Science Framework (OSF): https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/U7PBT.
AB - This scoping review aimed to map peer-reviewed studies applying digital tools for automatically or semi-automatically mapping work tasks, including their type, location, duration, or worker identification. Following Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar (2014–2024). Forty-nine studies were included, most of which were of moderate quality, limited by small and unrepresentative samples and low user involvement. Studies covered diverse occupations, mainly construction (n = 20) and manufacturing (n = 16). The most common tools were sensor-based (n = 24), vision-based (n = 13), multimodal (hybrid) (n = 6), and localisation-based (n = 4). Audio- and interaction-based tools appeared in single studies. Many tools captured task duration, some also worker identity, and fewer captured task location. These findings highlight both the potential and the current limitations of digital tools for mapping work tasks, underscoring the need for methodological development and real-world application in occupational research and practice. The protocol was preregistered in the Open Science Framework (OSF): https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/U7PBT.
KW - Digitale værktøjer
KW - Ergonomi
KW - Wearable
KW - Ergonomics
KW - Occupational health
U2 - 10.1016/j.apergo.2026.104828
DO - 10.1016/j.apergo.2026.104828
M3 - Journal article
SN - 0003-6870
VL - 137
JO - Applied Ergonomics
JF - Applied Ergonomics
ER -