比较传统和图形风险矩阵:医疗保健案例研究。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2025-09-21 DOI:10.1111/risa.70104
Albert Kutej, Stefan Rass, Rainer W Alexandrowicz
{"title":"比较传统和图形风险矩阵:医疗保健案例研究。","authors":"Albert Kutej, Stefan Rass, Rainer W Alexandrowicz","doi":"10.1111/risa.70104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Risk and opportunity assessments are essential for decision-making in complex systems such as healthcare and critical infrastructure. However, widely used tools like the risk matrix fail to explicitly capture uncertainty. This study presents the first empirical comparison between a traditional risk matrix and a previously proposed graphical method that visualizes uncertainty using two-dimensional intervals. In a comprehensive survey, healthcare professionals assessed identical scenarios using both methods. The graphical approach yielded systematically different results, particularly in the estimation of probabilities, and revealed differences across occupational groups and infrastructure experience. These findings suggest that explicitly representing uncertainty may enhance the transparency and nuance of qualitative risk assessments, potentially addressing key limitations of conventional tools. Such approaches could support more reflective and differentiated decision-making in high-stakes environments.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Traditional and Graphical Risk Matrices: A Case Study in Healthcare.\",\"authors\":\"Albert Kutej, Stefan Rass, Rainer W Alexandrowicz\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/risa.70104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Risk and opportunity assessments are essential for decision-making in complex systems such as healthcare and critical infrastructure. However, widely used tools like the risk matrix fail to explicitly capture uncertainty. This study presents the first empirical comparison between a traditional risk matrix and a previously proposed graphical method that visualizes uncertainty using two-dimensional intervals. In a comprehensive survey, healthcare professionals assessed identical scenarios using both methods. The graphical approach yielded systematically different results, particularly in the estimation of probabilities, and revealed differences across occupational groups and infrastructure experience. These findings suggest that explicitly representing uncertainty may enhance the transparency and nuance of qualitative risk assessments, potentially addressing key limitations of conventional tools. Such approaches could support more reflective and differentiated decision-making in high-stakes environments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Risk Analysis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Risk Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70104\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70104","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

风险和机会评估对于医疗保健和关键基础设施等复杂系统的决策至关重要。然而,像风险矩阵这样广泛使用的工具不能明确地捕捉不确定性。本研究提出了传统风险矩阵和先前提出的使用二维区间可视化不确定性的图形方法之间的第一次经验比较。在一项全面调查中,医疗保健专业人员使用两种方法评估了相同的情况。图形方法产生了系统不同的结果,特别是在概率估计方面,并揭示了职业群体和基础设施经验之间的差异。这些发现表明,明确表示不确定性可能会提高定性风险评估的透明度和细微差别,潜在地解决传统工具的关键局限性。这种方法可以在高风险环境中支持更多的反思和差异化决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing Traditional and Graphical Risk Matrices: A Case Study in Healthcare.

Risk and opportunity assessments are essential for decision-making in complex systems such as healthcare and critical infrastructure. However, widely used tools like the risk matrix fail to explicitly capture uncertainty. This study presents the first empirical comparison between a traditional risk matrix and a previously proposed graphical method that visualizes uncertainty using two-dimensional intervals. In a comprehensive survey, healthcare professionals assessed identical scenarios using both methods. The graphical approach yielded systematically different results, particularly in the estimation of probabilities, and revealed differences across occupational groups and infrastructure experience. These findings suggest that explicitly representing uncertainty may enhance the transparency and nuance of qualitative risk assessments, potentially addressing key limitations of conventional tools. Such approaches could support more reflective and differentiated decision-making in high-stakes environments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信