ArticleScientific reports2026
Prioritising construction accident risk factors using an integrated Random Forest, XGBoost, and ANN framework with sensitivity analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
Construction safety remains a critical concern due to accidents influenced by multiple interacting factors. While previous studies have identified key risk drivers, robust, data-driven approaches for prioritising them remain limited. This study proposes an integrated machine learning and sensitivity-based framework to systematically prioritise construction accident risk factors. A dataset of key safety-related variables was analysed using Random Forest Regression, Extreme Gradient Boosting, and Artificial Neural Networks. Model performance was evaluated using standard metrics, and sensitivity analysis quantified the relative importance of each risk factor. Within the available dataset, the Random Forest model achieved the highest observed test correlation coefficient of 0.813; however, statistical testing did not indicate significant differences between model prediction errors. Sensitivity analysis revealed that physical strain sub-factors, particularly mechanical and electrical strain, gravity-related tasks, and motion-related exertion, collectively account for 33.74% of the total influence on predicted accident risk. Cognitive demand factors, specifically perceived time pressure and workflow interruptions, represent the most influential secondary drivers. The top five sub-factors alone account for nearly half of the cumulative risk impact, providing a preliminary, data-driven basis for targeted safety interventions within the studied context, subject to further validation with larger, more geographically diverse datasets. The proposed framework offers a promising decision-support tool for construction stakeholders, enabling data-driven prioritisation of safety risks and supporting more informed resource allocation for risk mitigation, subject to further validation in real industrial environments.
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.