MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156733446 · doi:10.5539/jms.v3n2p100

Evaluation of Safety and Health Performance on Construction Sites (Kuala Lumpur)

2013· article· en· W2156733446 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
D. M. Yakubu, Ishak Bakri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational safety and healthKuala lumpurWork (physics)BusinessEnvironmental healthOperations managementTransport engineeringEngineeringMarketingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Occupational safety and health Act (Act 514) obligate each employer to provide and maintain a safe and healthful workplace for all his employees. Construction is a risky business with a lot of injuries and illness, due to poor safety performances. The aim of the study is to investigate the safety and health performance of contractors on construction sites. A comparative and sensitivity analysis conducted reveal that as allocation to the construction increases so also the rate of accidents increases and that fatal accidents contribute more to the total accidents rates, as such there is need to assess the performance of contractors as regard to safety and health operation. The result of the SHASSIC score reveal that the sites consider for the study were 3 – star in ranking, were its risks/hazards activities are well managed and documented, but still there are other risks/hazards activities that are not taken care off due to negligent on the side of the contractors. The finding affirm the importance of safety program in construction site, as such to ensure successful implementation of the safety program, the following condition must be made; management commitment, safe work condition and safe work habit.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.383 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207