The construction industry is vital for employment, making productivity and safety improvements crucial.
Objective
To address the persistent lack of integrated spatial and quantitative construction risk assessments, this study introduces a novel hybrid approach that merges the Construction Safety Risk Index with Kernel Density Estimation. This methodology fills an essential research gap in proactive construction risk management.
Method
This study was conducted during the 2023–2024 period within a large construction project. The study employed the CSRI technique and the KDE method. To implement this study, an information plan related to each section, along with an item description table and a probability and severity index table, was provided to the experts. By completing the item description table, the CSRI number for each item was determined. Ultimately, the output from the Kernel tool produced accident risk maps for each floor.
Results
The results indicate that most locations, including openings, electrical cables, electrical panels, gas lines, elevator shafts, and tower movement areas, were categorized within the yellow zones, which fall within the tolerable range. Approximately 62% of risk-prone zones were classified as yellow (tolerable). However, in certain areas, high-risk items interact with one another, resulting in some points on the map being marked in red. More than 85% of recorded incidents matched predicted red zones.
Conclusion
This study successfully integrates the CSRI and KDE to spatially assess construction risks. Most hazards fall within tolerable zones, while high-risk interactions create critical hotspots. The hybrid approach enhances proactive risk management, enabling targeted safety interventions.
ZhouZGohYMLiQ. Overview and analysis of safety management studies in the construction industry. Saf Sci2015; 72: 337–350.
2.
AlmaskatiDKermanshachiSPamidimukkalaA, et al.A review on construction safety: hazards, mitigation strategies, and impacted sectors. Buildings2024; 14: 526.
3.
SoltanzadehAMohammadfamIMoghimbeigiA, et al.Key factors contributing to accident severity rate in construction industry in Iran: a regression modelling approach. Arh Hig Rad Toksikol2016; 67: 47–53.
4.
YangEKimYRodgersC. Effects of a behavior-based safety observation program: promoting safe behaviors and safety climate at work. WORK2024; 77: 133–145.
5.
CavalcantiMLessaLVasconcelosBM. Construction accident prevention: a systematic review of machine learning approaches. WORK2023; 76: 507–519.
6.
AmiriMArdeshirAZarandiMHF. Fuzzy probabilistic expert system for occupational hazard assessment in construction. Saf Sci2017; 93: 16–28.
7.
AzadehARouhollahFDavoudpourF, et al.Fuzzy modelling and simulation of an emergency department for improvement of nursing schedules with noisy and uncertain inputs. Int J Services Oper Manage2013; 15: 58–77.
8.
AzadehAFamIMAzadehMA. Integrated HSEE management systems for industry: a case study in gas refinary. J Chin Inst Eng2009; 32: 235–241.
9.
AzadehAFamIMGarakaniMM. A total ergonomic design approach to enhance the productivity in a complicated control system. Inf Technol J2007; 6: 1036–1042.
10.
AzadehMKeramatiAMohammadfamI, et al.Enhancing the availability and reliability of power plants through macroergonomics approach. J Sci Ind Res2006; 65: 873–878.
11.
MahdiniaMYarandiMSJafariniaE, et al.Development of a new technique for safety risk assessment in construction projects based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part A: Civil Eng2021; 7: 04021037.
12.
SoltanzadehAMahdiniaMJafariniaE, et al.Occupational safety risk analysis in construction sites based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: a case study in a large construction project. Work2023; 76: 771–782.
13.
SoltanzadehAMahdiniaMOmidi OskoueiA, et al.Analyzing health, safety, and environmental risks of construction projects using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: a field study based on a project management body of knowledge. Sustainability2022; 14: 16555.
14.
MohammadfamISoltanzadehAMoghimbeigiA, et al.Use of artificial neural networks (ANNs) for the analysis and modeling of factors that affect occupational injuries in large construction industries. Electron Physician2015; 7: 1515.
15.
SoltanzadehAMohammadfamIMoghimbeygiA, et al.Exploring causal factors on the severity rate of occupational accidents in construction worksites. Int J Civil Eng2017; 15: 959–965.
16.
WaehrerGMDongXSMillerT, et al.Costs of occupational injuries in construction in the United States. Accid Anal Prev2007; 39: 1258–1266.
17.
AbbasiniaMMohammadfamI. Identifying, evaluating and prioritizing the causes of occupational accidents in the construction industry using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS. WORK2022; 72: 933–940.
18.
HallowellM. Cost-effectiveness of construction safety programme elements. Construction Management and Economics2010; 28: 25–34.
19.
Sanni-AnibireMOMahmoudASHassanainMA, et al.A risk assessment approach for enhancing construction safety performance. Saf Sci2020; 121: 15–29.
20.
AbdelkareemMMansourAM. Risk assessment and management of vulnerable areas to flash flood hazards in arid regions using remote sensing and GIS-based knowledge-driven techniques. Nat Hazards2023; 117: 2269–2295.
21.
SoltanzadehAMahdiniaMGolmohammadpourH, et al.Evaluating the potential severity of biogas toxic release, fire and explosion: consequence modeling of biogas dispersion in a large urban treatment plant. Int J Occup Saf Ergon2023; 29: 335–346.
22.
KuoF-YWenT-H. Assessing the spatial variability of raising public risk awareness for the intervention performance of COVID-19 voluntary screening: a spatial simulation approach. Applied Geography2022; 148: 102804.
23.
SoltanzadehAMohammadfamIMahdiniaM, et al.Construction accident data mining: a retrospective study using structural equation modeling based on 10-year data. Work2023; 75: 1341–1350.
24.
SmetanaMSalles de SallesLSukharevI, et al.Highway construction safety analysis using large language models. Appl Sci2024; 14: 1352.
25.
KulinanASParkMAungPPW, et al.Advancing construction site workforce safety monitoring through BIM and computer vision integration. Autom Constr2024; 158: 105227.
26.
VasconcelosBMSantosCJdOSoeiroA, et al.Analysis of occupational accidents for safety design. WORK2024; 79: 481–498.
27.
AkinloluMHauptTCEdwardsDJ, et al.A bibliometric review of the status and emerging research trends in construction safety management technologies. Int J Constr Manag2022; 22: 2699–2711.
28.
OkanE. Application of geographic information system (GIS) in education. J Tech Sci Technol2012; 1: 53–58.
29.
FungIWTamVWLoTY, et al.Developing a risk assessment model for construction safety. Int J Project Manage2010; 28: 593–600.
30.
SoltanzadehAMahdiniaMJafariniaE, et al.Occupational safety risk analysis in construction sites based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: a case study in a large construction project. Work2023; 76: 771–782.
31.
LeKGLiuPLinL-T. Traffic accident hotspot identification by integrating kernel density estimation and spatial autocorrelation analysis: a case study. Int J Crashworthiness2022; 27: 543–553.
32.
JahanvandBMortazaviSBMahabadiHA, et al.Determining essential criteria for selection of risk assessment techniques in occupational health and safety: a hybrid framework of fuzzy Delphi method. Saf Sci2023; 167: 106253.
33.
Dinis-TeixeiraJNunesABLeiteA, et al.Moving towards a core measures set for patient safety in perioperative care: an e-Delphi consensus study. Plos one2024; 19: e0311896.
34.
KabirSPapadopoulosY. A review of applications of fuzzy sets to safety and reliability engineering. Int J Approx Reason2018; 100: 29–55.
35.
LavasaniSMRamzaliNSabzalipourF, et al.Utilisation of Fuzzy Fault Tree Analysis (FFTA) for quantified risk analysis of leakage in abandoned oil and natural-gas wells. Ocean Eng2015; 108: 729–737.
36.
LiQYaoKZhangX. A change-point detection and clustering method in the recurrent-event context. J Stat Comput Simul2020; 90: 1131–1149.
37.
KobylińskaKCellmerRŹróbekS, et al.Using kernel density estimation for modelling and simulating transaction location. Int J Strat Prop Manage2017; 21: 29–40.
38.
ChenY-C. A tutorial on kernel density estimation and recent advances. Biostat Epidemiol2017; 1: 161–187.
39.
LüGBattyMStroblJ, et al.Reflections and speculations on the progress in geographic information systems (GIS): a geographic perspective. Int J Geogr Inf Sci2019; 33: 346–367.
40.
HasanpourMShadRMohammadzadeh MoghaddamA, et al.Hotspots identification of pedestrian crashes using kernel density estimation in GIS (case study: mashhad city). Road2017; 25: 19–30.
41.
KaratzoglouA. Applying network kernel density estimation (NKDE) and temporal network kernel estimation (TNKDE) for generating safer routes. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Computational Transportation Science, 2022.
42.
DrawveG. A metric comparison of predictive hot spot techniques and RTM. Justice Q2016; 33: 369–397.
43.
XieZYanJ. Kernel density estimation of traffic accidents in a network space. Comput Environ Urban Syst2008; 32: 396–406.
44.
ZhangGXuJ. Multi-GPU-Parallel and tile-based kernel density estimation for large-scale spatial point pattern analysis. ISPRS Int J Geoinf2023; 12: 31.
45.
MohandesSRZhangX. Developing a holistic occupational health and safety risk assessment model: an application to a case of sustainable construction project. J Cleaner Prod2021; 291: 125934.
46.
LuoQSunCLiY, et al.Applications of digital twin technology in construction safety risk management: a literature review. Eng Constr Architect Manag2024; 32: 3587–3607.
47.
YoonSChangTChiS. Developing an integrated construction safety management system for accident prevention. J Manag Eng2024; 40: 04024051.
48.
XiangPYangYYanK, et al.Identification of key safety risk factors and coupling paths in mega construction projects. J Manag Eng2024; 40: 04024023.
49.
CaoDChengL. Risk accumulation assessment method for building construction based on complex network. Eng Constr Architect Manag2025; 32: 1522–1545.
50.
RabbiABKJeelaniI. AI Integration in construction safety: current state, challenges, and future opportunities in text, vision, and audio based applications. Autom Constr2024; 164: 105443.
51.
KongH-QZhangN. Risk assessment of water inrush accident during tunnel construction based on FAHP-I-TOPSIS. J Cleaner Prod2024; 449: 141744.
52.
LiuH-CWangJ-HZhangL, et al.An integrated model for occupational health and safety risk assessment based on probabilistic linguistic information and social network consensus analysis. J Oper Res Soc2024; 75: 1308–1324.
53.
AnsariRDehghaniPMahdikhaniM, et al.A novel safety risk assessment based on fuzzy set theory and decision methods in high-rise buildings. Buildings2022; 12: 2126.
54.
KhalidUSagooABenachirM. Safety management system (SMS) framework development–mitigating the critical safety factors affecting health and safety performance in construction projects. Saf Sci2021; 143: 105402.
55.
MohandesSRAbdelmageedSHemS, et al.Occupational health and safety in modular integrated construction projects: the case of crane operations. J Cleaner Prod2022; 342: 130950.
56.
LiFZhangCHeX, et al.Superposition risk assessment and calculation model of the working position of coal-seam fire accidents in China. Fire2022; 6: 7.
57.
TixierAJPHallowellMRRajagopalanB. Construction safety risk modeling and simulation. Risk Anal2017; 37: 1917–1935.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
