ReviewErgonomics2015
Defining the methodological challenges and opportunities for an effective science of sociotechnical systems and safety.
Review in Ergonomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ethical concerns of AI in healthcare: A systematic review of qualitative studies.Nursing ethics · 2026Pooled it
- Expert Views on Criteria for Evaluation of Human Factors Methods: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- The biopsychosociotechnical model: a systems-based framework for human-centered health improvement.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2023Article
- The Job Perception Inventory: considering human factors and needs in the design of human-AI work.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- SEIPS 101 and seven simple SEIPS tools.BMJ quality & safety · 2021Review
- Why Do Haul Truck Fatal Accidents Keep Occurring?Mining, metallurgy & exploration · 2021Article
- Work systems analysis of sterile processing: decontamination.BMJ quality & safety · 2020Article
- SEIPS-based process modeling in primary care.Applied ergonomics · 2017Article
- Designing Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Support: A Cognitive Engineering Enterprise.Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making · 2016Article
- Sociotechnical attributes of safe and unsafe work systems.Ergonomics · 2015Article
- Article
- Editorial: emerging issues in sociotechnical systems thinking and workplace safety.Ergonomics · 2015Article
- Modelling and simulation of complex sociotechnical systems: envisioning and analysing work environments.Ergonomics · 2015Article
- Crossing levels in systems ergonomics: a framework to support 'mesoergonomic' inquiry.Applied ergonomics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An important part of the application of sociotechnical systems theory (STS) is the development of methods, tools and techniques to assess human factors and ergonomics workplace requirements. We focus in this paper on describing and evaluating current STS methods for workplace safety, as well as outlining a set of six case studies covering the application of these methods to a range of safety contexts. We also describe an evaluation of the methods in terms of ratings of their ability to address a set of theoretical and practical questions (e.g. the degree to which methods capture static/dynamic aspects of tasks and interactions between system levels). The outcomes from the evaluation highlight a set of gaps relating to the coverage and applicability of current methods for STS and safety (e.g. coverage of external influences on system functioning; method usability). The final sections of the paper describe a set of future challenges, as well as some practical suggestions for tackling these. PRACTITIONER SUMMARY: We provide an up-to-date review of STS methods, a set of case studies illustrating their use and an evaluation of their strengths and weaknesses. The paper concludes with a 'roadmap' for future work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.