ArticlePloS one2026
Critical risk identification in construction projects using 2D and 3D risk matrices.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Construction projects are exposed to numerous risks that may adversely affect project cost and duration. The purpose of this study is to identify and prioritize key construction risks by combining a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) with a Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) and analyzing these risks using two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) risk matrices. In total, 63 risk factors were identified and categorized into five main areas of the work breakdown structure: earthwork, concrete, finishing, mechanical, and electrical. The questionnaire was designed based on each risk category and then sent to engineers, who were asked to estimate the risk probability and its impact. In total, 378 engineers responded. The respondents data were analyzed by using the risk matrix method. Two separate 3D risk matrices were made: one was based on multiplying all three data points, and the other was based on combining both impacts. The results clearly show that the 3D matrix, which combines cost and time impact, yields more accurate results than the matrix that multiplies cost impact and time impact.
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.