ArticleHeliyon2025
Lessons learnt from horse-related human fatalities: Accident analysis using HFACS-Equestrianism.
Article in Heliyon, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Equestrianism has an opportunity to learn lessons relating to safer human-horse interactions from those who no longer have a voice, by drawing data from the investigation of horse-related human fatalities and participating in accident analysis. Many human-horse related injuries and fatalities are not examined in equestrianism for the purpose of developing safer future risk mitigation practice, often due to the philosophy that horse sport is simply dangerous. This study analysed data from the Australian National Coronial Information System (NCIS) relating to fatalities involving human-horse interaction that occurred between 2000 and 2020. A total of 50 human-horse related fatalities were identified from the NCIS database for analysis using a validated accident analysis framework. The aim of the study was to identify what we could learn and potentially do differently to prevent future fatalities. This was done through a detailed frequency analysis of the underlying causes identified from the coronial investigation using Human Factors Analysis and Classification System-Equestrianism (HFACS-Eq), an accident analysis model specifically designed for equestrianism. As to be expected, the analysis found that most fatalities involved falls 56 % (n = 28) resulting in blunt force trauma 96 % (n = 48), with the horse as causal factor 90 % (n = 45). Beyond these obvious findings, the HFACS-Eq analysis revealed additional findings that in turn can guide future health, safety, and welfare advances in equestrianism. The analysis presented in this paper highlights the environment, surroundings, or location in which the human-horse interact as a critical factor of accident causation. Also, the role of non-technical skills such as communication, effective supervision, and adequate leadership were highlighted as factors that could contribute to enhanced safety in this high-risk domain. The human-horse dyad in equestrianism is complex and unique when compared to other high-risk work and non-work activities. A better understanding of the risk factors involved in handling and riding horses, coupled with a model to help mitigate that risk will also set us on the path to a good life for horses because human safety and horse welfare are inextricably linked.
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.