Cited by 34Sleep and Work-Related FatigueOccupational Health and Safety ResearchHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

How shift scheduling practices contribute to fatigue amongst freight rail operating employees: Findings from Canadian accident investigations

Rudin-Brown, Christina M., Harris, Sarah, Rosberg, Ari·2019·Accident Analysis & Prevention

Abstract

Canada's freight rail system moves 70% of the country's surface goods and almost half of all exports (RAC, 2016). These include dangerous goods. Anonymous survey of freight rail operating employees conducted by the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference (TCRC, 2014) revealed that many do not report getting enough sleep because of their work schedules, and that fatigue may be affecting their performance at work. Besides general impairments in attention and cognitive functioning, fatigue in railway operating employees slows reaction time to safety alarms and impairs conformance to train operating requirements. Shift scheduling practices can contribute to sleep-related fatigue by restricting sleep opportunities, requiring extended periods of wakefulness and by disrupting daily (circadian) rhythms. The primary goal of accident investigation is to identify causal and contributing factors so that similar occurrences can be prevented. A database search of Transportation Safety Board (TSB) rail investigation reports published in the 21-year period from 1995 to 2015 identified 18 that cited sleep-related fatigue of freight rail operating employees as a causal, contributing, or risk finding. This number represents about 20% of TSB rail investigations from the same period in which a human factors aspect of freight train activities was a primary cause. Exploration of accident themes suggests that management of fatigue and shift scheduling in the freight rail industry is a complex issue that is often not conducive to employee circadian rhythms and sleep requirements. It also suggests that current shift scheduling and fatigue management practices may be insufficient to mitigate the associated safety risk. Railway fatigue management systems that are based on the principles of modern sleep science are needed to improve scheduling practices and mitigate the ongoing safety risk.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aap.2018.01.027

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rudin-Brown, C. M., Harris, S., & Rosberg, A.
Corresponding author
Rudin-Brown, Christina M.
Venue
Accident Analysis & Prevention
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
126
Pages
64-69
ISSN
0001-4575 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2791856549
Cited by
34
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Accident Analysis & Prevention (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Occupational Health and Safety Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
shift scheduling, railroad accident investigation, circadian rhythm, fatigue management, dangerous goods, human factors, railway safety, sleep deprivation, reaction time
MeSH terms
Accidents, Canada, Fatigue, Humans, Personnel Staffing and Scheduling, Surveys and Questionnaires, Railroads, Sleep, Work Schedule Tolerance, Risk Assessment, Sleep Disorders, Circadian Rhythm

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review