Evolution of Risk Analysis Approaches in Construction Disasters: A Systematic Review of Construction Accidents from 2010 to 2025

Guardat en:
Dades bibliogràfiques
Publicat a:Buildings vol. 15, no. 20 (2025), p. 3701-3749
Autor principal: Medaa Elias
Altres autors: Shirzadi Javid Ali Akbar, Malekitabar Hassan
Publicat:
MDPI AG
Matèries:
Accés en línia:Citation/Abstract
Full Text + Graphics
Full Text - PDF
Etiquetes: Afegir etiqueta
Sense etiquetes, Sigues el primer a etiquetar aquest registre!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 3265841296
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 2075-5309 
024 7 |a 10.3390/buildings15203701  |2 doi 
035 |a 3265841296 
045 2 |b d20251015  |b d20251031 
084 |a 231437  |2 nlm 
100 1 |a Medaa Elias 
245 1 |a Evolution of Risk Analysis Approaches in Construction Disasters: A Systematic Review of Construction Accidents from 2010 to 2025 
260 |b MDPI AG  |c 2025 
513 |a Literature Review 
520 3 |a Structural collapses are a major threat to urban safety and infrastructure resilience and as such there is growing research interest in understanding the causes and improving the prediction of risk to prevent human and material losses. Whether caused by fires, earthquakes or progressive failures due to overloads and displacements, these events have been the focus of investigation over the past 15 years. This systematic literature review looks at the use of formal risk analysis models in structural failures between 2010 and 2025 to map methodological trends, assess model effectiveness and identify future research pathways. From an initial database of 139 documented collapse incidents, only 42 were investigated using structured risk analysis frameworks. A systematic screening of 417 related publications yielded 101 peer-reviewed studies that met our inclusion criteria—specifically, the application of a formal analytical model. This discrepancy highlights a significant gap between the occurrence of structural failures and the use of rigorous, model-based investigation methods. The review shows a clear shift from single-method approaches (e.g., Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) or Finite Element Analysis (FEA)) to hybrid, integrated models that combine computational, qualitative and data-driven techniques. This reflects the growing recognition of structural failures as socio-technical phenomena that require multi-methodological analysis. A key contribution is the development of a strategic framework that classifies models by complexity, data requirements and cost based on patterns observed across the reviewed papers. This framework can be used as a practical decision support tool for researchers and practitioners to select the right model for the context and highlight the strengths and limitations of the existing approaches. The findings show that the future of structural safety is not about one single “best” model but about intelligent integration of complementary context-specific methods. This review will inform future practice by showing how different models can be combined to improve the depth, accuracy and applicability of structural failure investigations. 
651 4 |a United States--US 
653 |a Earthquakes 
653 |a Finite element method 
653 |a Construction accidents & safety 
653 |a Structural engineering 
653 |a Accuracy 
653 |a Investigations 
653 |a Structural safety 
653 |a Urban planning 
653 |a Civil engineering 
653 |a Researchers 
653 |a Risk analysis 
653 |a Risk assessment 
653 |a Literature reviews 
653 |a Structural failure 
653 |a Qualitative analysis 
653 |a Machine learning 
653 |a Decision support systems 
653 |a Highway construction 
653 |a Emergency communications systems 
653 |a Fault tree analysis 
653 |a Disasters 
653 |a Mathematical models 
653 |a Integrated approach 
653 |a Finite element analysis 
653 |a Seismic engineering 
653 |a Collapse 
653 |a Building failures 
653 |a Risk management 
653 |a Failure investigations 
653 |a Systematic review 
653 |a Construction site accidents 
700 1 |a Shirzadi Javid Ali Akbar 
700 1 |a Malekitabar Hassan 
773 0 |t Buildings  |g vol. 15, no. 20 (2025), p. 3701-3749 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Engineering Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3265841296/abstract/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text + Graphics  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3265841296/fulltextwithgraphics/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text - PDF  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3265841296/fulltextPDF/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch