Complutense University Library

Correspondence Model Of Occupational Accidents

Conte, Juan C and Rubio , Emilio A and Garcia, Ana I and Cano Sevilla, Francisco Jose (2010) Correspondence Model Of Occupational Accidents. Anais Da Academia Brasileira De Ciencias, 83 (3). pp. 1131-1146. ISSN 0001-3765

[img] PDF
Restricted to Repository staff only until 2020.

1MB

Official URL: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/aabc/v83n3/aop3211.pdf

View download statistics for this eprint

==>>> Export to other formats

Abstract

We present a new generalized model for the diagnosis and prediction of accidents among the Spanish workforce. Based on observational data of the accident rate in all Spanish companies over eleven years (7,519,732 accidents), we classified them in a new risk-injury contingency table (19x19). Through correspondence analysis, we obtained a structure composed of three axes whose combination identifies three separate risk and injury groups, which we used as a general Spanish pattern. The most likely or frequent relationships between the risk and injuries identified in the pattern facilitated the decision-making process in companies at an early stage of risk assessment. Each risk-injury group has its own characteristics, which are understandable within the phenomenological framework of the accident. The main advantages of this model are its potential application to any other country and the feasibility of contrasting different country results. One limiting factor, however, is the need to set a common classification framework for risks and injuries to enhance comparison, a framework that does not exist today. The model aims to manage work-related accidents automatically at any level.


Item Type:Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:Correspondence Model; Contingency Analysis; Risk; Injury; Occupational Accidents;
Subjects:Sciences > Mathematics > Mathematical statistics
ID Code:14835
References:

AGUILERA AM. 2001. Tablas de contingencia bidimensionales.

Madrid: La Muralla, Col. Cuadernos de Estadística

15: 23–36.

AGUILERA AM. 2006. Modelización de tablas de contingencia

multidimensionales. Madrid: La Muralla, Col.

Cuadernos de Estadística 33: 25–28.

AMENDOLA A. 2002. Recent paradigms for risk informed

decision making. Safety Sci 40: 17–30.

BARAM M. 2009. Globalization and workplace hazards in

developing nations. Safety Sci 47: 756–766.

BARIL R, BERTHELETTE D AND MASSICOTTE P. 2003.

Early return towork of injuredworkers: multidimensional

patterns of individual and organizational factors. Safety

Sci 41: 277–300.

BECK U. 1999. World risk society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

BENZÉCRI J. 1992. Correspondence analysis handbook.

New York: Marcel Decker.

CONTE JC, CANO F, GARCIA AI AND RUBIO E. 2008.

Interpretación de las relaciones intragrupales de riesgos

y lesiones mediante análisis cluster jerárquico. Rev Mat

Teor Aplic 15: 175–186.

CONTE JC, MARCOS G, GARCIA AI AND RUBIO E. 2007.

Análisis del problema empírico de identificación del

riesgo. Cuad Bioest Aplic Infor 17: 12–25.

DOUGLAS M AND WILDAVSKY A. 1982. Risk and culture.

An essay on the selection of technical and environmental

dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.

FINE W. 1973. Mathematical evaluations for controlling

hazards. Georgia: Academic Press, Selected Reading in

Safety, p. 1–22.

FRIJTERS A AND SWUSTE P. 2008. Safety assessment in

design and preparation phase. Safety Sci 46: 272–281.

GARCIA AI, CONTE JC, RUBIO E AND PEREZ A. 2009.

Accidente laboral. ACSOM una nueva orientación para

la gestión automática del riesgo. An Sist Sanit Navar

32: 23–34.

GIDDENS A. 1994. Les conséquences de la modernité. Paris:

L’Harmattan.

GREENACRE M AND BLASIUS J. 1994. Correspondence

analysis in social science. Recent developments and applications.

San Diego: Academic Press, p. 141–161.

GULDENMUND FW. 2000. The nature of safety culture: a

review of theory and research. Safety Sci 34: 215–257.

HAIR JF, ANDERSON RE, TATHAM RL AND BLACK WC.

1999. Análisis Multivariante. Madrid: Prentice Hall

Iberia SRL, 5th ed., p. 575–578.

HAMMER W. 1994. Unfallgefährdung und verhütung beim

Gehen, Laufen, Tragen, Schieben und Ziehen im landwirtschaftlichen

Betrieb. Safety Sci 17: 117–143.

HAND D, MANNILA H AND SMITH P. 2001. Principles of

data mining. London: Bradford Book, MIT Press.

JOARISTI L AND LIZASOAIN L. 1999. Análisis de correspondencias.

Madrid: La Muralla, Col. Cuadernos de Estadística

5: 35–52.

KJELLÉN U AND SKLET S. 1995. Integrating analyses of

the risk of occupational accidents into the design process.

Part I: A review of types of acceptance criteria and risk

analysis methods. Safety Sci 18: 215–227.

KÖRVERS P AND SONNEMANS P. 2008. Accidents: A discrepancy

between indicators and facts! Safety Sci 46:

1067–1077.

LAFLAMME L, DÖÖS M AND BACKSTRÖM T. 1991. Identifying

accidents patterns using the FAC and HAC: their

application to accidents at the engine workshops of an

automobile and truck factory. Safety Sci 14: 13–33.

LEVESON N. 2004. A new accident model for engineering

safer systems. Safety Sci 42: 237–270.

NACHREINER F, NICKEL P AND MEYER I. 2006. Human

factors in process control systems: The design of human

machine interfaces. Safety Sci 44: 5–26.

NICHOLSON A. 1998. Analysis of spatial distributions of

accidents. Safety Sci 31: 71–91.

RASMUSSEN J. 1997. Risk management in a dynamic society:

a modelling problem. Safety Sci 27: 183–213.

REAL JE. 2001. Escalamiento multidimensional. Madrid: La

Muralla, Col. Cuadernos de Estadística 14: 8–14.

ROUHIAINEN V. 1992. QUASA: A method for assessing the

quality of safety analysis. Safety Sci 15: 155–172.

RUBIO E. 1983. Estadística para médicos: fundamentos.

Universidad de Zaragoza, Cátedra de Bioestadística,

Facultad de Medicina, p. 119–122.

SARI M, SELCUK S, KARPUZ C AND DUZGUN S. 2009.

Stochastic modelling of accident risks associated with an

underground coal mine in Turkey. Safety Sci 47: 78–87.

SCHROEDER-FRECHETTE K. 1999. Risk. In: CRAIG E AND

FLORIDI L. Routledge Encyclopaedia of Philosophy.

London: Routledge.

VAN DUIJNE F, VAN AKEN D AND SCHOUTEN G. 2008.

Considerations in developing complete and quantified

methods for risk assessment. Safety Sci 46: 245–254.

WILLIAMSON A, FEYER A AND CAIRNS DR. 1996. Industry

differences in accident causation. Safety Sci 24: 1–12.

An Acad

Deposited On:18 Apr 2012 10:09
Last Modified:06 Feb 2014 10:10

Repository Staff Only: item control page