Search alternatives:
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
lower decrease » linear decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
lower decrease » linear decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search)
-
441
-
442
-
443
-
444
-
445
-
446
-
447
-
448
-
449
-
450
-
451
-
452
-
453
-
454
-
455
Individual data.
Published 2025“…Average oxygen consumption (VO2) was significantly lower (2.36 mL/kg/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 2.81; p = 0.023), and peak VO2 was 3.33 mL/kg/min lower with the exoskeleton (t = 2.37; p = 0.045). …”
-
456
Descriptive statistics.
Published 2025“…Average oxygen consumption (VO2) was significantly lower (2.36 mL/kg/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 2.81; p = 0.023), and peak VO2 was 3.33 mL/kg/min lower with the exoskeleton (t = 2.37; p = 0.045). …”
-
457
Time matched metabolic cost.
Published 2025“…Average oxygen consumption (VO2) was significantly lower (2.36 mL/kg/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 2.81; p = 0.023), and peak VO2 was 3.33 mL/kg/min lower with the exoskeleton (t = 2.37; p = 0.045). …”
-
458
Research design.
Published 2025“…Average oxygen consumption (VO2) was significantly lower (2.36 mL/kg/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 2.81; p = 0.023), and peak VO2 was 3.33 mL/kg/min lower with the exoskeleton (t = 2.37; p = 0.045). …”
-
459
Time matched physiological strain.
Published 2025“…Average oxygen consumption (VO2) was significantly lower (2.36 mL/kg/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 2.81; p = 0.023), and peak VO2 was 3.33 mL/kg/min lower with the exoskeleton (t = 2.37; p = 0.045). …”
-
460
Physiological strain.
Published 2025“…Average oxygen consumption (VO2) was significantly lower (2.36 mL/kg/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 2.81; p = 0.023), and peak VO2 was 3.33 mL/kg/min lower with the exoskeleton (t = 2.37; p = 0.045). …”