Industrial exoskeletons are globally developed, explored, and increasingly implemented in industrial workplaces. Multiple technical, physical, and psychological aspects should be assessed prior to their daily application in various occupational environments. The methodology for evaluating these aspects is not standardised and differs in terms of focussed research objectives, used types of analyses, applied testing procedures, and use cases. The aim of this paper is to provide a matrix comparing the prevalence of different types of analyses combined with their respective research objective(s). A systematic review in the database 'Web of Science' identified 74 studies, mainly in laboratory settings, with a focus on short-term effects as well as with male-dominated samples being low representative for industrial workforces. The conducted evaluation methodologies are further discussed and compared in terms of testing procedure, sample, and research objectives. Finally, relevant aspects for prospectively evaluating industrial exoskeletons in a more harmonised and comprehensive way are suggested. Practitioner summary: Industrial exoskeletons are still inconsistently and insufficiently evaluated in scientific studies, which might hamper the comparability of systems, threaten the human health, and block an iterative system optimisation. Thus, a comprehensive evaluation methodology is needed with harmonised and multicriteria types of analyses.