What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018.
Saved in:
| Title: | What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Hulme, Adam1 (AUTHOR) ahulme@usc.edu.au, Stanton, Neville A.1 (AUTHOR), Walker, Guy H.1 (AUTHOR), Waterson, Patrick1 (AUTHOR), Salmon, Paul M.1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Safety Science. Aug2019, Vol. 117, p164-183. 20p. |
| Subjects: | Systems theory, Meta-analysis, Sociotechnical systems, Accidents |
| Abstract: | • We conducted a systematic literature review of contemporary systems thinking accident analysis methods. • Qualitative and quantitative syntheses of study results were performed for Accimap, HFACS, STAMP-CAST, and FRAM. • Across the methods, a majority of the contributory factors underpinning accident causation were identified at lower system levels. • The development of novel accident analysis approaches in the safety science research context is encouraged based on the findings discussed. This systematic review examines and reports on peer reviewed studies that have applied systems thinking accident analysis methods to better understand the cause of accidents in a diverse range of sociotechnical systems contexts. Four databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched for published articles during the dates 01 January 1990 to 31 July 2018, inclusive, for original peer reviewed journal articles. Eligible studies applied AcciMap, the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), the Systems Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) method, including Causal Analysis based on STAMP (CAST), and the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM). Outcomes included accidents ranging from major events to minor incidents. A total of 73 articles were included. There were 20, 43, six, and four studies in the AcciMap, HFACS, STAMP-CAST, and FRAM methods categories, respectively. The most common accident contexts were aviation, maritime, rail, public health, and mining. A greater number of contributory factors were found at the lower end of the sociotechnical systems analysed, including the equipment/technology, human/staff, and operating processes levels. A majority of studies used supplementary approaches to enhance the analytical capacity of base applications. Systems thinking accident analysis methods have been popular for close to two decades and have been applied in a diverse range of sociotechnical systems contexts. A number of research-based recommendations are proposed, including the need to upgrade incident reporting systems and further explore opportunities around the development of novel accident analysis approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Safety Science is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: egs DbLabel: Engineering Source An: 136934344 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hulme%2C+Adam%22">Hulme, Adam</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> ahulme@usc.edu.au</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stanton%2C+Neville+A%2E%22">Stanton, Neville A.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Walker%2C+Guy+H%2E%22">Walker, Guy H.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Waterson%2C+Patrick%22">Waterson, Patrick</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Salmon%2C+Paul+M%2E%22">Salmon, Paul M.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Safety+Science%22">Safety Science</searchLink>. Aug2019, Vol. 117, p164-183. 20p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Systems+theory%22">Systems theory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Meta-analysis%22">Meta-analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sociotechnical+systems%22">Sociotechnical systems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accidents%22">Accidents</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: • We conducted a systematic literature review of contemporary systems thinking accident analysis methods. • Qualitative and quantitative syntheses of study results were performed for Accimap, HFACS, STAMP-CAST, and FRAM. • Across the methods, a majority of the contributory factors underpinning accident causation were identified at lower system levels. • The development of novel accident analysis approaches in the safety science research context is encouraged based on the findings discussed. This systematic review examines and reports on peer reviewed studies that have applied systems thinking accident analysis methods to better understand the cause of accidents in a diverse range of sociotechnical systems contexts. Four databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched for published articles during the dates 01 January 1990 to 31 July 2018, inclusive, for original peer reviewed journal articles. Eligible studies applied AcciMap, the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), the Systems Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) method, including Causal Analysis based on STAMP (CAST), and the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM). Outcomes included accidents ranging from major events to minor incidents. A total of 73 articles were included. There were 20, 43, six, and four studies in the AcciMap, HFACS, STAMP-CAST, and FRAM methods categories, respectively. The most common accident contexts were aviation, maritime, rail, public health, and mining. A greater number of contributory factors were found at the lower end of the sociotechnical systems analysed, including the equipment/technology, human/staff, and operating processes levels. A majority of studies used supplementary approaches to enhance the analytical capacity of base applications. Systems thinking accident analysis methods have been popular for close to two decades and have been applied in a diverse range of sociotechnical systems contexts. A number of research-based recommendations are proposed, including the need to upgrade incident reporting systems and further explore opportunities around the development of novel accident analysis approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Safety Science is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=136934344 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1016/j.ssci.2019.04.016 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 20 StartPage: 164 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Systems theory Type: general – SubjectFull: Meta-analysis Type: general – SubjectFull: Sociotechnical systems Type: general – SubjectFull: Accidents Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Hulme, Adam – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Stanton, Neville A. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Walker, Guy H. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Waterson, Patrick – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Salmon, Paul M. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 08 Text: Aug2019 Type: published Y: 2019 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 09257535 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 117 Titles: – TitleFull: Safety Science Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
