SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
A Review of Data Mining Strategies by Data Type, with a Focus on Construction Processes and Health and Safety Management.
Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increasingly, information technology facilitates the storage and management of data useful for risk analysis and event prediction. Studies on data extraction related to occupational health and safety are increasingly available; however, due to its variability, the construction sector warrants special attention. This review is conducted under the research programs of the National Institute for Occupational Accident Insurance (Inail).
objectivesThe research question focuses on identifying which data mining (DM) methods, among supervised, unsupervised, and others, are most appropriate for certain investigation objectives, types, and sources of data, as defined by the authors.
methodsScopus and ProQuest were the main sources from which we extracted studies in the field of construction, published between 2014 and 2023. The eligibility criteria applied in the selection of studies were based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). For exploratory purposes, we applied hierarchical clustering, while for in-depth analysis, we used principal component analysis (PCA) and meta-analysis.
resultsThe search strategy based on the PRISMA eligibility criteria provided us with 63 out of 2234 potential articles, 206 observations, 89 methodologies, 4 survey purposes, 3 data sources, 7 data types, and 3 resource types. Cluster analysis and PCA organized the information included in the paper dataset into two dimensions and labels: "supervised methods, institutional dataset, and predictive and classificatory purposes" (correlation 0.97-8.18 × 10
conclusionsThe meta-analysis provided an overall estimate of the better effectiveness of supervised methods (Odds Ratio = 0.71, Confidence Interval 0.53-0.96) compared to not-supervised methods.
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.