首页> 外文OA文献 >Bridging the Research-Practice Gap: Validity of a Software Tool Designed to Support Systemic Accident Analysis by Risk Managers
【2h】

Bridging the Research-Practice Gap: Validity of a Software Tool Designed to Support Systemic Accident Analysis by Risk Managers

机译:弥合研究实践缺口:软件工具的有效性,旨在通过风险管理人员支持全身事故分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Despite the proposed advantages of systems accident analysis (SAA) methods for understanding incident-causation, these approaches have not been widely adopted by practitioners. This represents a significant gap between research and practice in accident analysis. The Understanding and Preventing Led Outdoor Accidents Data System (UPLOADS) provides a series of tools to address this gap. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of UPLOADS by comparing analyses generated by risk managers and researchers experienced in SAA. Twenty-three risk managers used UPLOADS to collect and analyse incident data from their organization over a three month period. The reports were then analyzed by two researchers experienced in SAA, and compared to those generated by participants. Participants identified half the number of factors identified by researchers, and tended to focus on only one or two factors as the causes of each incident. The potential consequences for practitioners’ understanding of incident-causation and countermeasure development are discussed, as well as ways of improving the system.
机译:尽管系统事故分析(SAA)方法的理解事故方法的拟议优势,但这些方法尚未被从业人员广泛采用。这代表了事故分析中的研究与实践之间的显着差距。了解和预防LED户外事故数据系统(上传)提供了一系列解决此差距的工具。本研究的目的是通过比较风险管理者和SAA所经历的研究人员产生的分析来评估上传的有效性。二十三个风险管理人员使用上传到三个月内从组织收集和分析事件数据。然后通过SAA经历的两名研究人员分析了报告,并与参与者产生的两位研究人员进行了分析。与会者确定了研究人员确定的因素数量的一半,并倾向于仅关注一个或两个因素作为每个事件的原因。讨论了从业者对事件的理解和对策发展的潜在后果,以及改善系统的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号