Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

As part of our co-operation with the Telecommunication Agency of the Netherlands, we want to formulate an accident analysis method and model for use in incidents in telecommunications that cause service unavailability. In order to not re-invent the wheel, we wanted to first get an overview of all existing accident analysis methods and models to see if we could find an overarching method and commonalities between models. Furthermore, we wanted to find any methods that had been applied to incidents in telecommunication networks or even been designed specifically for these incidents. In this article, we present a systematic literature review of incident and accident analysis methods across domains. We find that accident analysis methods have experienced a rise in attention over the last 15 years, leading to a plethora of methods. We discuss the three classes in which they are often categorized. We find that each class has its own advantages and disadvantages: an analysis using a sequential method may be easier to understand and communicate and quicker to execute, but may miss vital underlying causes that can later trigger new, similar accidents. An analysis using an epidemiological method takes more time, but it also finds underlying causes the resolution of which may prevent accidents from happening in the future. Systemic methods are appropriate for complex, tightly coupled systems and executing such a method takes a lot of time and resources, rendering it very expensive. This will often not be justified by the costs of the accident (especially in telecommunications networks) and it will therefore be too expensive to be employed in regular businesses.
We were not able to find any published definitions of structured methods specific to telecommunications, nor did we find any applications of structured methods specifically to telecommunications.
Original languageEnglish
PublisherCentre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT)
Number of pages57
StatePublished - 4 Jun 2017

Publication series

NameCTIT Technical Report
No.TR-CTIT-17-04
ISSN (Electronic)1381-3625

Fingerprint

Accidents
Telecommunication
Telecommunication networks
Wheels
Costs
Industry

Cite this

Wienen, H. C. A., Bukhsh, F. A., Vriezekolk, E., & Wieringa, R. J. (2017). Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review. (CTIT Technical Report; No. TR-CTIT-17-04). Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT).

Wienen, Hans Christian Augustijn; Bukhsh, Faiza Allah; Vriezekolk, E.; Wieringa, Roelf J. / Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review.

Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT), 2017. 57 p. (CTIT Technical Report; No. TR-CTIT-17-04).

Research output: ScientificReport

@book{8f4911df4a214bafbce86e6bcdc9bd51,
title = "Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review",
abstract = "As part of our co-operation with the Telecommunication Agency of the Netherlands, we want to formulate an accident analysis method and model for use in incidents in telecommunications that cause service unavailability. In order to not re-invent the wheel, we wanted to first get an overview of all existing accident analysis methods and models to see if we could find an overarching method and commonalities between models. Furthermore, we wanted to find any methods that had been applied to incidents in telecommunication networks or even been designed specifically for these incidents. In this article, we present a systematic literature review of incident and accident analysis methods across domains. We find that accident analysis methods have experienced a rise in attention over the last 15 years, leading to a plethora of methods. We discuss the three classes in which they are often categorized. We find that each class has its own advantages and disadvantages: an analysis using a sequential method may be easier to understand and communicate and quicker to execute, but may miss vital underlying causes that can later trigger new, similar accidents. An analysis using an epidemiological method takes more time, but it also finds underlying causes the resolution of which may prevent accidents from happening in the future. Systemic methods are appropriate for complex, tightly coupled systems and executing such a method takes a lot of time and resources, rendering it very expensive. This will often not be justified by the costs of the accident (especially in telecommunications networks) and it will therefore be too expensive to be employed in regular businesses.We were not able to find any published definitions of structured methods specific to telecommunications, nor did we find any applications of structured methods specifically to telecommunications.",
author = "Wienen, {Hans Christian Augustijn} and Bukhsh, {Faiza Allah} and E. Vriezekolk and Wieringa, {Roelf J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
series = "CTIT Technical Report",
publisher = "Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT)",
number = "TR-CTIT-17-04",
address = "Netherlands",

}

Wienen, HCA, Bukhsh, FA, Vriezekolk, E & Wieringa, RJ 2017, Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review. CTIT Technical Report, no. TR-CTIT-17-04, Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT).

Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review. / Wienen, Hans Christian Augustijn; Bukhsh, Faiza Allah; Vriezekolk, E.; Wieringa, Roelf J.

Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT), 2017. 57 p. (CTIT Technical Report; No. TR-CTIT-17-04).

Research output: ScientificReport

TY - BOOK

T1 - Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review

AU - Wienen,Hans Christian Augustijn

AU - Bukhsh,Faiza Allah

AU - Vriezekolk,E.

AU - Wieringa,Roelf J.

PY - 2017/6/4

Y1 - 2017/6/4

N2 - As part of our co-operation with the Telecommunication Agency of the Netherlands, we want to formulate an accident analysis method and model for use in incidents in telecommunications that cause service unavailability. In order to not re-invent the wheel, we wanted to first get an overview of all existing accident analysis methods and models to see if we could find an overarching method and commonalities between models. Furthermore, we wanted to find any methods that had been applied to incidents in telecommunication networks or even been designed specifically for these incidents. In this article, we present a systematic literature review of incident and accident analysis methods across domains. We find that accident analysis methods have experienced a rise in attention over the last 15 years, leading to a plethora of methods. We discuss the three classes in which they are often categorized. We find that each class has its own advantages and disadvantages: an analysis using a sequential method may be easier to understand and communicate and quicker to execute, but may miss vital underlying causes that can later trigger new, similar accidents. An analysis using an epidemiological method takes more time, but it also finds underlying causes the resolution of which may prevent accidents from happening in the future. Systemic methods are appropriate for complex, tightly coupled systems and executing such a method takes a lot of time and resources, rendering it very expensive. This will often not be justified by the costs of the accident (especially in telecommunications networks) and it will therefore be too expensive to be employed in regular businesses.We were not able to find any published definitions of structured methods specific to telecommunications, nor did we find any applications of structured methods specifically to telecommunications.

AB - As part of our co-operation with the Telecommunication Agency of the Netherlands, we want to formulate an accident analysis method and model for use in incidents in telecommunications that cause service unavailability. In order to not re-invent the wheel, we wanted to first get an overview of all existing accident analysis methods and models to see if we could find an overarching method and commonalities between models. Furthermore, we wanted to find any methods that had been applied to incidents in telecommunication networks or even been designed specifically for these incidents. In this article, we present a systematic literature review of incident and accident analysis methods across domains. We find that accident analysis methods have experienced a rise in attention over the last 15 years, leading to a plethora of methods. We discuss the three classes in which they are often categorized. We find that each class has its own advantages and disadvantages: an analysis using a sequential method may be easier to understand and communicate and quicker to execute, but may miss vital underlying causes that can later trigger new, similar accidents. An analysis using an epidemiological method takes more time, but it also finds underlying causes the resolution of which may prevent accidents from happening in the future. Systemic methods are appropriate for complex, tightly coupled systems and executing such a method takes a lot of time and resources, rendering it very expensive. This will often not be justified by the costs of the accident (especially in telecommunications networks) and it will therefore be too expensive to be employed in regular businesses.We were not able to find any published definitions of structured methods specific to telecommunications, nor did we find any applications of structured methods specifically to telecommunications.

M3 - Report

T3 - CTIT Technical Report

BT - Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review

PB - Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT)

ER -

Wienen HCA, Bukhsh FA, Vriezekolk E, Wieringa RJ. Accident Analysis Methods and Models — a Systematic Literature Review. Centre for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT), 2017. 57 p. (CTIT Technical Report; TR-CTIT-17-04).