A Comprehensive Literature Review on Construction Project Risk Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ermias Tesfaye ◽  
Eshetie Berhan ◽  
Daniel Kitaw
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Construction Project ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Research Gaps ◽  
The Past ◽  
Comprehensive Literature Review ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Assessment Techniques ◽  
Project Risk Analysis

The purpose of this paper is to present the chronological development of risk assessment techniques and models undertaken in construction project for the past two decades. This research used a systematic review and meta-analysis on risk assessment of construction project literatures. This includes browsing relevant researches and publications, screening articles based on the year of publication, identifying the domains and attributes. Accordingly, findings of major results achieved have been presented systematically based on the chronology of the research and research gaps are identified. From the review, it is found out that the dominant risk assessment tools used for the past twenty years is statistical analysis and fuzzy expert system.

A Comprehensive Literature Review on Construction Project Risk Analysis

2018 ◽  
pp. 289-307
Author(s):  
Ermias Tesfaye ◽  
Eshetie Berhan ◽  
Daniel Kitaw
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Construction Project ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Fuzzy Expert System ◽  
Project Risk ◽  
The Past ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Assessment Techniques ◽  
Project Risk Analysis

The purpose of this paper is to present the chronological development of risk assessment techniques and models undertaken in construction project for the past two decades. This research used a systematic review and meta-analysis on risk assessment of construction project literatures. This includes browsing relevant researches and publications, screening articles based on the year of publication, identifying the domains and attributes. Accordingly, findings of major results achieved have been presented systematically based on the chronology of the research and research gaps are identified. From the review, it is found out that the dominant risk assessment tools used for the past twenty years is statistical analysis and fuzzy expert system.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT ON STORM SURGE RISKS TO CONTAINERS CONSIDERING GLOBAL WARMING

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rikito Hisamatsu ◽  
Rikito Hisamatsu ◽  
Kei Horie ◽  
Kei Horie
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Storm Surge ◽  
Storm Surges ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Inundation Depth ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Maps ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Vulnerability Functions

Container yards tend to be located along waterfronts that are exposed to high risk of storm surges. However, risk assessment tools such as vulnerability functions and risk maps for containers have not been sufficiently developed. In addition, damage due to storm surges is expected to increase owing to global warming. This paper aims to assess storm surge impact due to global warming for containers located at three major bays in Japan. First, we developed vulnerability functions for containers against storm surges using an engineering approach. Second, we simulated storm surges at three major bays using the SuWAT model and taking global warming into account. Finally, we developed storm surge risk maps for containers based on current and future situations using the vulnerability function and simulated inundation depth. As a result, we revealed the impact of global warming on storm surge risks for containers quantitatively.

scholarly journals The Benefits of Risk Assessment Tools for Prostate Cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 662-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian M. Thompson ◽  
Donna P. Ankerst
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

Suicide risk assessment in a large public mental health service: do suicide risk classifications identify those at risk?

2021 ◽  
pp. 103985622098403
Author(s):  
Marianne Wyder ◽  
Manaan Kar Ray ◽  
Samara Russell ◽  
Kieran Kinsella ◽  
David Crompton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Suicide Risk ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Suicide Risk Assessment ◽  
Public Mental Health Service ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

Introduction: Risk assessment tools are routinely used to identify patients at high risk. There is increasing evidence that these tools may not be sufficiently accurate to determine the risk of suicide of people, particularly those being treated in community mental health settings. Methods: An outcome analysis for case serials of people who died by suicide between January 2014 and December 2016 and had contact with a public mental health service within 31 days prior to their death. Results: Of the 68 people who had contact, 70.5% had a formal risk assessment. Seventy-five per cent were classified as low risk of suicide. None were identified as being at high risk. While individual risk factors were identified, these did not allow to differentiate between patients classified as low or medium. Discussion: Risk categorisation contributes little to patient safety. Given the dynamic nature of suicide risk, a risk assessment should focus on modifiable risk factors and safety planning rather than risk prediction. Conclusion: The prediction value of suicide risk assessment tools is limited. The risk classifications of high, medium or low could become the basis of denying necessary treatment to many and delivering unnecessary treatment to some and should not be used for care allocation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document