Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34208018›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Safe-by-Design in Engineering: An Overview and Comparative Analysis of Engineering Disciplines.

Pieter van Gelder, Pim Klaassen, Behnam Taebi, Bart Walhout, Ruud van Ommen, Ibo van de Poel, Zoe Robaey, Lotte Asveld, Ruud Balkenende, Frank Hollmann and 9 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Metal-organic frameworks in oral drug delivery.Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2024
    Article
  4. A Practical Framework for Promoting Justice-Oriented Innovation in Radiology.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2024
    Article
  5. Adopting Safe-by-Design in Science and Engineering Academia: The Soil May Need Tilling.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  6. Development of Framework for Estimating Fatality-Related Losses in the Korean Construction Industry.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Pieter van GelderSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0001-0351
Pim KlaassenAthena Institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0029-6393
Behnam TaebiSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2244-2083
Bart WalhoutNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Ruud van OmmenSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7884-0323
Ibo van de PoelSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9553-5651
Zoe RobaeyDepartment of Social Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Lotte AsveldSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2524-7814
Ruud BalkenendeSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.
Frank HollmannSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4821-756X
Erik Jan van KampenSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.
Nima KhakzadSchool of Occupational and Public Health, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3899-6830
Robbert KrebbersSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.
Jos de LangeSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.
Wolter PietersFaculty of Social Sciences, Radboud University, 6525 XZ Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3985-4452
Karel TerwelSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.
Eelco VisserSafety and Security Institute, Delft University of Technology, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5593-4471
Tiny van der WerffDirectorate Environmental Safety and Risks, Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, 2515 XP The Hague, The Netherlands.
Dick JungDirectorate Environmental Safety and Risks, Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, 2515 XP The Hague, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper, we provide an overview of how Safe-by-Design is conceived and applied in practice in a large number of engineering disciplines. We discuss the differences, commonalities, and possibilities for mutual learning found in those practices and identify several ways of putting those disciplinary outlooks in perspective. The considered engineering disciplines in the order of historically grown technologies are construction engineering, chemical engineering, aerospace engineering, urban engineering, software engineering, bio-engineering, nano-engineering, and finally cyber space engineering. Each discipline is briefly introduced, the technology at issue is described, the relevant or dominant hazards are examined, the social challenge(s) are observed, and the relevant developments in the field are described. Within each discipline the risk management strategies, the design principles promoting safety or safety awareness, and associated methods or tools are discussed. Possible dilemmas that the designers in the discipline face are highlighted. Each discipline is concluded by discussing the opportunities and bottlenecks in addressing safety. Commonalities and differences between the engineering disciplines are investigated, specifically on the design strategies for which empirical data have been collected. We argue that Safe-by-Design is best considered as a specific elaboration of Responsible Research and Innovation, with an explicit focus on safety in relation to other important values in engineering such as well-being, sustainability, equity, and affordability. Safe-by-Design provides for an intellectual venue where social science and the humanities (SSH) collaborate on technological developments and innovation by helping to proactively incorporate safety considerations into engineering practices, while navigating between the extremes of technological optimism and disproportionate precaution. As such, Safe-by-Design is also a practical tool for policymakers and risk assessors that helps shape governance arrangements for accommodating and incentivizing safety, while fully acknowledging uncertainty.

Indexed as

EngineeringTechnologyAttitudeHumanitiesSocial Sciencesdesign for valuesresponsible research and innovationrisk-based designsafe-by-designsecure-by-designuncertainty

Identifiers

PMID34208018
PMCPMC8296130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.