A Conceptual Framework for BIM Process Flow to Mitigate the Causes of Fall-Related Accidents at the Design Stage

Abstract

Safety training is essential in enhancing safe environments, attitudes, and employee safety behaviour. It has been recognized that the construction industry must tackle the inefficiencies of conventional safety training methods. Using innovative training practices for construction workers is one of the most effective ways to improve safety performance. There is a lack of a standard framework and of necessary information for building information modelling (BIM) process flow needed by designers and safety and health officers to aid construction workers’ safety and job hazard identification (JHI) at the design stage. This study aims to create a framework for BIM process flow to minimize the causes of fall-related accidents in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry. This framework was developed based on an integrative review approach and other empirical findings. The connection of the different components makes up the framework. This research recommends practical enhancements, innovation, and adjustments to construction employees’ safety training and JHI. One of the suggested framework’s research advantages is that it evolved through expert validation and contains the necessary components to facilitate practical construction safety training and JHI. These components could serve as a starting point for developing guidelines for practical safety training and JHI.

1. Introduction

Construction accidents are primarily due to inadequate safety education, training, job hazard identification (JHI), and control [1]. A significant source of concern in safety management is a lack of adequate worker construction safety training [2]. Workers who are not adequately trained are less capable of recognizing potentially hazardous situations on site [3]. Workers’ willingness to adopt safe work practices is also heavily influenced by safety perception, the level of safety education, and the training they have received, among other things [4]. Safety issues are mainly caused by personal behaviour [5]. One of the contributing factors to risky worker behaviour is inadequate safety training. Safety training teaches workers about safe work practices and reduces accident frequency and severity on construction sites. It also reduces the likelihood of unsafe behaviour occurring [6]. Safety training is essential in enhancing safe environments, attitudes, and employee safety behaviour [7].

Construction workers are traditionally trained using 2D drawings, pictures, or photographs or otherwise using visualization technologies. Traditional safety training, JHI, and preventive strategies are taught using 2D drawings, photographs, accident reports, and the trainer’s experience [8,9]. It has been recognized that the construction industry needs to tackle the inefficiencies of conventional safety training methods now in use [8]. The traditional process of construction safety planning does not account for frequent schedule changes or differences in potential hazards [10]. The disadvantages and limitations of using traditional safety training methods are that they do not simulate the actual construction processes or activities [3], are ineffective at disseminating safety-related information and identifying job hazards, and are not interactive [11]. Furthermore, accidents are difficult to identify and prevent when training is based on 2D drawings and the experiences of safety trainers [12].

Another major factor affecting construction safety training is the language barrier between the instructors and the labourers or co-workers [13]. Foreign workers are not primarily given safety training in their mother tongue or in a way that considers their literacy level. A more significant number of construction accidents occur due to the differences in language between the local and foreign workers [14]. Because Spanish is their primary language, many Hispanic workers in the United States construction industry struggle to understand their supervisor’s safety instructions, leading to poor safety performance and low productivity [15]. According to the study, 3D-simulated virtual job sites effectively enhance learning in construction workers with limited English proficiency during training sessions [13]. Because of the growing number of foreign construction workers in international construction projects, innovative safety training methods must compensate for the ineffectiveness of traditional counterfeits.

Giving traditional construction safety training to construction workers that may not yield the desired results on site is not sustainable, especially for more advanced and complex construction projects. In light of recent safety concerns and widespread unsustainable safety management, safe, sustainable construction projects are in high demand [16,17,18]. Multiple dangers associated with sustainable construction projects can result in multiple accidents [17,18,19]. This is because some dangers are new, and some sustainable constructions projects are being implemented for the first time, which might result in unanticipated accidents [20,21,22]. Accidents could easily happen on sustainable construction projects because of how complicated the engineering is, how bad the safety management is, and how unreliable the safety management techniques are [16,23]. Depending on the type and size of the project, it is essential to recognize that sustainable construction projects may have a relatively high potential for significant or minor occupational accidents [24]. The growing complexity of sustainable construction projects renders conventional safety management systems ineffective (e.g., traditional method of construction safety training) [16,17,18,23]. These factors necessitate sophisticated safety management that facilitates the completion of sustainable construction projects with no or fewer accidents. Sustainable development projects must adopt and implement effective safety management (e.g., a modern safety training approach). Safety training is essential in enhancing the safe environment, attitudes, and employee safety behaviour, and it would be improved if it were updated with new technologies such as BIM, VR, and AR. Safety training is one of the essential components of safety management [19]. It is important in sustainable construction projects because it helps reduce injuries and fatalities, minimize injuries/fatalities costs and reduce workers’ compensation insurance premiums [16,17]. Among the social sustainability practices are training, education, job knowledge transformation [25,26], and prevention through design (PtD) [26,27], while hazard identification and risk assessments (HIRAs) are also environmentally sustainable practices [25,27].

Using innovative training practices for construction workers is one of the most effective ways to improve safety performance. There is an urgent need for improvement. Adopting new safety training programs can help workers improve their hazard recognition skills [28]. Traditional hazard recognition strategies have failed to address the problem of low hazard recognition levels [29]. Previous research has shown that BIM-based tools could be used to reduce accidents or fatal injuries on construction sites [30]. It could help safety managers better plan safety actions. Digital construction and BIM have been recognized as the main drivers globally in construction industries [31]. As a result of BIM’s flexibility and versatility, it is the most promising technology in the AEC industry, particularly in safety management [32]. However, the enormous potential of BIM has not been completely realized, primarily due to project participants’ use of disparate BIM models, resulting in information duplication and interoperability issues.

BIM solutions will emerge from early collaboration amongst the various players to develop a reference framework. There is a lack of standard framework and necessary information for BIM process flow needed by the designers and safety and health officers to aid construction workers’ safety and JHI at the design stage. The study aims to create a framework for BIM process flow to minimize the causes of fall-related accidents in the AEC industry. The paper is structured as follows. The following section presents the relevant past literature. Section 3 presents the framework design, development, and validation, and Section 4 explains the critical components of the developed framework. The last part concludes the main arguments of the paper.

2. Background of the Study

2.1. Fall-Related Accidents

In the construction industry, fall from height is a major cause of multiple severe injuries and deaths [33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40]. It is considered the most common sort of construction accident compared with incidents in other industries [41]. Fall-related accidents are most frequent in the US (41.7%) [42], China (48%) [2], UK (57%) [43], Korea (54.1%) [38], Taiwan (41.7%) [44], and Malaysia (37.10%) [45]. This study considers every fall from 1.8 m or higher during construction work to be a fall-related accident. The source of the fall might be the main building itself, an opening in the floor, the edge of the floor, structural parts, the stairway, the working platform, a hole in the roof, or a pit or trench.

2.2. The Use of Building Information Modelling (BIM)-Based Tools at the Pre-Construction Stage

The most significant applications of BIM-based tools at the pre-construction stage identified through a critical literature review are explained in Table 1 below. It has been found that BIM technology can be used for various tasks applications and safety training, and JHI could be one of them.

2.3. BIM and Safety Training

Several studies have shown that BIM could greatly benefit the AEC industry as a tool that can improve safety through project team coordination at design and during construction [63,64]. The BIM-based tools can be used to teach or train construction workers how to identify potential job hazards and complete the assigned task effectively and efficiently without accidents. The BIM-based model can be applied to worker safety training, design, planning, and accident investigation [65]. Workers trained using 3D BIM simulation have demonstrated a higher understanding of safety training than workers trained conventionally [66]. Park and Kim [1] proposed a safety management and visualization system that combines BIM, augmented reality (AR), location tracking, and game engine technologies for inspection, safety education, and training. Clevenger, et al. [67] built a scaffolding prototype of an interactive, BIM-enabled, 3D visualization safety training module tested with university undergraduate students. According to the study’s findings, such an innovative teaching method is more effective than traditional methods. Li, et al. [28] built a BIM-related practical behaviour-based safety (PBBS) method to provide instantaneous cautions and post-real-time studies for safety training. This was achieved by repeatedly observing and documenting workers’ unsafe location-based behaviours. Shen and Marks [68] developed a framework for collecting and visualizing near-miss data within a BIM platform, allowing construction workers to view near misses and identify hazardous areas throughout a project. However, the proposed framework relies on accident cases, training material, and inspection checklists. These studies did not consider and explain BIM process flow.

2.4. BIM and Job Hazard Identification (JHI)

The ability of construction workers to identify and analyse potential hazards efficiently is a significant factor affecting workplace safety [69]. Workers can quickly assess and recognize potential risks in a visual environment, improving and comprehending safety training more quickly [70]. The digitization of the construction site enables virtual reviews and data-driven inquiries to recognize likely hazards that may arise during the early stages of the project and construction processes [64]. Integrating visualization technology (BIM-based tools, for example) with safety-related management rules and standards enables workers to comprehend possible hazards through a project’s life cycle [12,71].

Several studies have been conducted on BIM-based tool task applications for JHI in different circumstances. Tran, et al. [72] developed a hazard identification approach spatial-temporal exposure analysis (HISTEA) system that integrated hazard data into 4D BIM. The system was designed to improve hazard identification, resulting in fewer accidents caused by overlapping activities. The relevant experts validated it via a survey questionnaire. Zhang, et al. [8] created an automatic BIM-based framework to identify potential fall hazards. However, the proposed method is inapplicable to complicated construction conditions. Zhang, et al. [73] also built a framework that uses BIM-based tools to spot unguarded edges of slabs and holes and automatically mount a guardrail. The disadvantage of this study is that extra work is needed to employ manual modelling whenever there are design changes. By combining Autodesk Revit and Unity 3D with design safety rules, Hongling, et al. [74] also created a BIM-safety-rule-integrated system that automatically detects possible hazards. However, this system did not study the dynamic construction process, and only limited safety rules for particular situations were considered.

Hossain, et al. [75] also proposed an intelligent BIM-integrated risk management system that could assist designers in identifying potential dangers and providing design suggestions for eradicating or mitigating the extent of hazards during construction, operation, and maintenance. However, only limited hazards were included in the research knowledge library. Kim, et al. [76] created a system as a plug-in that automatically identifies scaffolding safety issues by analysing BIM-based models and schedules; however, only work spaces were regarded as potential dangers. Alizadehsalehi, et al. [77] proposed a methodology based on BIM and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology that allows safety managers to recognize dangers at various project phases and create appropriate mitigation strategies. The proposed method may help designers, workers, and safety managers reduce construction accidents and fatalities. However, they neither considered nor explained BIM process flow.

3. Framework, Design, Development and Validation

Developing a framework directs research efforts, strengthens relationships through shared understanding, and includes relevant concepts into a descriptive or predictive model [78]. By analysing the literature, secondary, and survey data, fall from height was identified as the most frequent construction accident and the need to prevent it using an advanced safety training method and JHI. The proposed framework mainly focuses on safety training and JHI at the design stage of a construction project and their effect on accident prevention. Accident rates on-site may be significantly reduced with the aid of building information Modelling (BIM) technology. The framework is meant to assist in connecting the theoretical and practical parts of a project so that its progress gains logic and significance.

The results are expected to provide a standard framework for BIM-based tools to be widely used for workers’ comprehensive safety training and JHI. The research results will guide designers/contractors/safety and health officers in giving extensive safety training and JHI in a 3D virtual environment. The conceptual framework indicates the features that should be used to carry out practical safety training and JHI. The framework also recommends mitigating hazards in actual construction with the cost involved. This preventive strategy will result in fewer casualties and may lower construction costs, benefiting everyone. The approach will improve collaboration between the project team members, training and education, information sharing, and many more benefits. The process will also impact the project budget and affect construction methods; however, it will also significantly enhance and improve the health and safety of construction workers. The preventive measures can be fully understood by obtaining relevant safety information from the appropriate professionals and existing knowledge on the subject matter, and by utilizing the best practices around the globe. The study took place in Malaysia, and the relevant standards (e.g., BIM standard, occupational safety and health administration, US (OSHA), department of safety and health, Malaysia (DOSH)) were used for the framework development.

The BIM process flow framework to aid construction workers’ safety training and JHI at the pre-construction stage was developed based on the integrative review approach and other empirical findings. The first step was to analyse the most recent and relevant papers on the examined subject. The results after the literature review support the need for the BIM process flow framework for the advanced construction safety training method and JHI of fall-related accidents. Then, the key parameters were determined and defined from the reviewed literature and their linkages. The framework was built by combining the critical components identified from the literature and the data from the other empirical studies. There was a need to validate and test the developed framework. The developed framework then underwent applicability assessment through a semi-structured interview to determine its robustness. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the relevant construction professionals to validate the developed framework. The BIM process flow framework to aid construction workers’ safety training and JHI at the pre-construction stage was developed based on the integrative review approach and other empirical findings. Though a conceptual framework can be validated through interviews, focus groups, nominal groups, video conferencing, and Delphi procedures for pure engineering and technology management studies such as this, interviews are the most dependable strategy in this study because they do not necessitate an excessive number of resources that may be unavailable. Nineteen academics and industry professionals were selected for the framework validation. However, there is no universally applicable formula for determining the number of interviewees and the number of interviews to perform with each person [79]. Qualitative approaches have no established sample size guidelines [80]. However, the critical point is that as many interviews as possible should be included to determine the applicability of the proposed developed framework. The number of experts utilised in this study was considered sufficient for validating the developed framework. Most interviews were done over the phone because of COVID-19 restrictions and limited resources, and the interview questions were sent by email in advance to the interviewees. The interview questions and framework were appended to a cover letter outlining the research’s principal objective. A series of interviews were conducted to obtain the experts’ perspectives about the framework’s overview, ease of use, completeness, comprehensiveness, content, and the connection between the key components. The interview strategy generated mainly qualitative data. Data processing is a significant task and a source of difficulty in qualitative research. Data and information were analysed immediately following each interview to identify recurring and consistent themes. The new framework generated from the literature assessment and other empirical findings was refined considering the semi-structured interview findings. The framework comprises six major components: human aspect, nature of the project, technological part, organizational size, best practices or standards, and hazard characterization. These components should be incorporated into the concept and principle based on BIM process flow.

4. Framework Components

To begin developing a conceptual framework, a researcher must include all factors that appear to be significant and then exclude those that are not. An element may be expressed as a collection of smaller factors. The aspect encompasses a subset of features that cannot be expanded upon or are more suitably grouped for evocative purposes. The connection of the different components makes up the framework. The framework consists of six major components: human aspect, nature of the project, technological part, organizational size, best practices or standards, and hazard characterization. Figure 1 shows the key concepts and significant elements used in the framework development.

4.1. Human Aspect

The stakeholders’ relationship during the design and construction phases is defined by the type and nature of the procurement process in a BIM-based project. According to Eastman, et al. [81], BIM and integrated project delivery (IPD) are complementary and provide a clear alternative to current linear methods focused on information exchange via paper representations. The owner is the critical benefactor in this procurement procedure, as he specifies what he wants from the project’s participants and how it can be accomplished. This kind of contract may assist construction worker safety training and JHI. The owner assigns the designers to assemble the global BIM model at the design stage and contractors to construct the proposed building projects or infrastructural development. The contractors are also usually in charge of assigning the safety officers, subcontractors, suppliers and providing labour for the construction phase. The global BIM model is generally made by design and construction professionals, and the project team members have access to virtually any information or data depending on the BIM protocol. The design practitioners typically include architects, civil/structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) engineers, quantity surveyors, and safety management officers, among others, based on the objective of this research. In contrast, the construction group includes a project manager, construction manager, planning consultant, and regulation specialist.

The construction industry is defined by, and frequently criticized, for data fragmentation, low productivity, ineffective work processes, and poor communication among the project stakeholders, particularly with information sharing [82]. Traditionally, project stakeholders operate on their platforms with little or no interaction of information or data. There are numerous advantages to implementing BIM in the workplace, since it promotes collaboration and coordination among those involved in a project, resulting in a more efficient work process in an integrated and single platform. There are ramifications for the information flow into the design process in a BIM-based project, some of which are provided by contractors, safety professionals, and other relevant professionals who are often involved later in the process. As proposed in this study, their engagement may enable early safety training and hazard detection for construction employees. Construction management may bring experience, project collaboration, and safety expertise to the design process and suggest alternate construction means and procedures. Trade contractors, subcontractors, and construction management also contribute insight into the design’s general safety problems, as they will be directly impacted. The primary elements of the human aspect are further explained in following subsections.

4.1.1. The Client/Owner

The client or owner is at the centre of the construction process. The terms client and owner are used interchangeably throughout this study because they mean the same thing. The client has the option of not being fully involved in all phases of the project and maintaining a holistic perspective on it by appointing a representative (client’s representative). They must rely on experts to fulfil their responsibilities if they lack construction skills. The representative obtains the project information from the assigned principal designer and contractor and updates the client. The essential requirement is to keep informed about the project’s progress. But the chief designer and contractor will require the client’s or client’s representative support and involvement to do their tasks effectively. They ensure that adequate time and resources are set aside for each project step. The client must budget appropriately for design, design reviews, planning, hazard identification, risk assessment, control measures, contractor selection, mobilization, sequencing, work schedule, and construction [83]. The client has a critical role in promoting a systematic construction health and safety management approach. The use of BIM-based tools for construction workers’ safety training and JHI at the planning and design stage depends solely on the client’s interest. However, owners think about profitability, and they will always prioritize numbers and make judgments based on a thorough cost–benefit analysis [84]. Those appointed must also possess all the essential qualifications, training, and experience to complete the project correctly. They must also know the relevant acts or regulations regarding their various roles and responsibilities. These measures will ensure a decrease in injuries or fatalities and the overall risk associated with the project. They should exert influence over the individuals he has appointed to guarantee the health and safety of construction workers during the project lifecycle.

4.1.2. Designers

A designer is a corporation or individual whose primary function is to create or alter designs for construction projects or arrange for or direct others. Architects, consulting engineers, quantity surveyors, and anybody else that defines and modifies designs as part of their profession are all examples of designers. They can also be general contractors, specialty contractors, tradesmen, or even commercial clients if they actively participate in design work that is similar to that which is BIM based. The design team’s primary responsibility is to take a concept and bring it to life through their professional abilities. They must thoroughly understand architectural standards, engineering methods, codes of practice, and drawings. They should also understandably communicate this technical expertise to clients. The designer’s role is to educate clients on their obligations under most construction statutes and regulations.

Designs may include, but are not limited to, drawings, design details, specifications, bills of material, and design calculations. We can add construction workers’ safety training and JHI to the list in our case. However, planning for safety training and hazard identification for construction workers demands a newly qualified expert with design and construction understanding. Designers are expected to add the safety knowledge obtained from the best practices to a BIM-based project to make detailed 3D parametric models for safety training and job hazard detection with the help of a safety and health officer. The decisions made by a designer can significantly impact the health and safety of everyone engaged in the construction of a building or infrastructural development and those who utilise, maintain, renovate, and eventually demolish it. They eliminate all perceived health and safety risks to those impacted by the project or make efforts to mitigate or control hazards that cannot be stopped. From the start, it is critical to incorporate health and safety considerations into the design process. Many analyses of construction fatalities have revealed that focusing more on design for safety (DfS) can reduce the likelihood of accidents by 50–60% [75]. However, designers’ lack of DfS-related knowledge and a lack of guidelines and tools are the most significant barriers to DfS implementation [85]. Although this concept has been around for more than 20 years, BIM-based safety approaches are relatively new, and research in this field is still in its early stages [86]. However, many designers believe that contractors and subcontractors are responsible for protecting construction workers. This demonstrates that most projects do not incorporate the ideas of safety specialists at the outset, which might be highly advantageous in achieving overall project safety.

4.1.3. The Contractors

A contractor is a person or organization that performs work on a project’s construction. The term ‘contractor’ also refers to managing or doing construction work and supplies labour or materials for a project. They fulfil their responsibilities by organizing activities, overseeing employees, ensuring that the project complies with local codes and laws, provides construction equipment, and helps to avoid accidents on site. A contractor employs a subcontractor and safety management officer to assist with specific tasks and safety for construction workers. The contractor is responsible for ensuring health and safety on the construction site by adopting appropriate processes and educating the construction workers about safety. They must possess the necessary skills, knowledge, experience, and, when applicable, organizational competence to perform the work safely and without putting anybody in danger. They must provide a sustainable safety program to protect construction workers and ensure they wear the suitable PPE on-site. They must also ensure a robust safety program for worker health and safety. They use the information or data supplied by the designers before and during the construction processes to achieve an accident-free construction site.

For example, a BIM-based project enables the owner, contractor (safety officer), and designer to collaborate on the global model during the planning and design stage. In addition, the project owner and designers may communicate their expectations directly to the contractor. BIM provides the contractor with an accurate visual representation and mitigates hazards. BIM can also simulate crane operations concerning overhead power lines to prevent struck-by or related accidents. A contractor can also identify design defects before construction, which reduces rework and costs.

4.1.4. Safety and Health Officer/Trainer

A construction safety and health officer is responsible for implementing and enforcing construction laws, safety regulations, and environmental criteria on a construction site usually employed by the contractor. Their primary function is to ensure the safety of the construction workers by implementing the appropriate and correct safety measures. However, they may take on additional tasks and responsibilities during the project execution. They must be fully conversant with safety and security procedures, construction equipment, and supplies. They organize and coordinate all safety-related aspects of construction and job site activities to ensure that the project is completed safely and effectively. They are responsible for identifying and providing the best safety training to construction workers, including basic industry-specific and site-specific safety instruction. Safety training teaches employees about potential hazards, how to prevent them, and what to do in the event of an emergency. Safety training for workers should cover site safety, the importance of understanding and following instructions, identifying workplace hazards, avoiding and minimizing risks, and how to use PPE on site [87]. A safety officer may request additional employee feedback to improve or develop new plans (e.g., a new safety training approach).

The emergence of BIM and other related technology will alter how safety officers interact with a project. These technological tools can aid in the detection of hazardous circumstances during the project’s planning and design stage. Traditionally, they come into play right after the design stage and during construction. Safety professionals can rely on them to develop new accident mitigation methods (e.g., training of the construction workers) and action plans. They can liaise with the designers on the contractor’s order to provide comprehensive safety training and JHI using BIM-based tools at the planning and design stage.

4.1.5. Construction Workers

A construction worker works physically constructing the built environment and its infrastructure. They are most frequently referred to as performing various conventional construction duties throughout a building project or infrastructural development. Plumbers, bricklayers, concreters, electricians, scaffolders, carpenters, roofers, painters, mechanics, equipment or machine operators, excavators, decorators, housekeepers, and helpers are examples of construction workers. On a construction site, a construction worker works for a contractor. A contractor must communicate with his employees or representative on any health and safety issues affecting them. They provide safety training to them under the leadership of the safety management officer.

The age, gender, level of education, language differences, training method, and work experience of an employee can impact the safety training they receive. Misjudgement of hazardous situations, primarily by new workers, tends to cause accidents on construction sites because they lack the proper experience to carry out the assigned tasks, especially if the project is complex. You cannot compare an old employee with vast experience with a novice who has just started. Workers rely substantially on their observations and experiences to identify hazards [88]. There is a strong correlation between a worker’s age and experience and his level of safety awareness [89]. However, in providing safety training and JHI at the design stage, the construction workers must collaborate with the designers, contractors, and safety officers to guarantee that the project’s specifications are met. It is believed that this proposed method can mitigate accidents on site. Construction workers can perform their assigned tasks on site safely and effectively if:

• They possess the necessary skills, knowledge, training, and experience.

• They are provided with the supervision necessary to safely perform the task without putting their lives in danger.

• They are educated about the health and safety risks associated with their work and how to manage them.

• They constantly adhere to the site’s rules and regulations and comply with strict health and safety requirements.

• They notify whoever controls the work on-site of any dangers they discover, regardless of whether the risks affect their health and safety or others.

• They can comprehend supervisory orders and operate constructively with other team members.

4.2. Nature of the Project

A project is often defined as a collection of interconnected actions or activities that have a distinct beginning and end and lead to a definite purpose. The project’s nature begins with identifying and describing the works to be executed. The nature of the project will require careful consideration of the project team’s selection, the suitable methodology, tools, equipment or machinery, budget, time, and the necessary actions or activities to accomplish the intended objectives safely and effectively. The following significant elements were used in this study to explain the nature of a project.

4.2.1. Public or Private Project

A public project is one that the government finances, usually government owned and maybe government operated. It can encompass large-scale infrastructure projects such as highways, bridges, dams, trains, tunnels, and public amenities such as hospitals, schools, jails, libraries, and recreation centres. For example, the Malaysian government mandated the use of BIM-based tools for any construction project that reaches RM100 million and above [90]. Implementing the proposed framework at the planning and design stage will be much easier with this setup. However, its introduction may incur additional costs and time but reduce construction site accidents.

On the other hand, a private project is financed, managed, or commissioned by a private individual or organization. There is no benchmark regarding using BIM-based tools in private projects. However, using advanced technology for safety training and JHI for workers may reduce accidents and, subsequently, the money that may be used in the case of an accident for compensation and loss of productivity.

4.2.2. Complexity, Uniqueness, and Type of the Project

The project’s complexity, uniqueness, and kind can influence the safety training and JHI required in a construction project. Each project is unique and distinct. While repetitive aspects may be present in project deliverables and activities, they are always unique in their composition or arrangement. Traditional (i.e., paper-based) safety training and JHI methods may not be sufficient for a complex project because some hazards might not be detectable easily, as they might be in a straightforward task, because of the literacy and experience level of the workers. Advanced methods (i.e., use of BIM-based tools) of safety training and JHI may do away with the shortcomings of the conventional approach by providing information that is close to the reality of a construction site before it commences. This means additional cost and time, but it is worth it because it may reduce fatal accidents on site.

4.2.3. Scope, Budget, and Time Constraint

Including safety training and JHI early in a project’s life cycle can significantly impact the project’s budget and schedule. They are incorporated in the project estimates and are expressed as a margin of error (plus or minus). A simple technique to visualize a project’s progress is to view the relationship between the scope, schedule, and budget as a triangle [91]. Any change to one of the sides of the triangles results in a shift in the other sides. The developer, the beneficiaries, or the project’s completion time, budget, or scope can define the project’s end.

The project scope contains all the relevant information regarding the end deliverables for a project. Before a project may be regarded as a success, the features and functions described in the scope must be completed. The project budget sets the maximum amount spent on a given project. A construction budget generally dictates the speed with which a project may be completed, the talent needed, equipment, materials, and the technologies used to produce the desired objectives. Cost is a constraint, as very few projects may end without cost overrun. Numerous tasks inside a project require a certain amount of processing time, and there is little one can do to lessen it. Appropriate schedule control needs the identification of tasks to be performed, an accurate estimation of their durations, the sequence in which they will be completed, and the allocation of people and other relevant resources in a project. Introducing safety training and job hazard identification at the planning and design stage may alter a project’s scope, budget, and time frame. However, it may also reduce fatal accidents during the construction processes.

4.2.4. Contractual Agreement

A construction contract agreement is a legally binding document establishing the scope of work and payment terms for a construction project [92]. The document specifies which parties will be engaged, the money to be paid, the party’s respective rights, and the dates on which construction will begin and end. Each agreement will differ depending on the project, with adjustments for the scope of work, pricing, and other pertinent criteria. However, most contract agreements should have specific parts that safeguard both parties to the deal, and the agreement should have multiple sections of clauses detailing the project’s scope, terms, and conditions.

One could argue that BIM affects relationships and distorts the borders between project team members’ duties and responsibilities concerning legal and contractual status [93]. Adopting BIM in construction projects necessitates the establishment of specific obligations and liabilities and constraints on the agreed-upon use of the global model. It can be achieved by adopting the BIM protocol into contract documents. The BIM protocol specifies the technical readiness of the models, data representation, information sharing, communication, and other relevant procedures in a construction project [94]. It is a document that details the contractual terms applicable to construction projects within BIM models and participants’ rights and obligations. Along with other strategies, it is critical to the general adoption of BIM [95]. Companies should incorporate construction workers’ safety training and JHI in the BIM protocol for those interested in this great idea of reducing construction accidents. Depending on the company, each has its own BIM protocol or adapts a particular standard (e.g., The Construction Industry Council (CIC) BIM protocol). The person in charge of the protocol is an information manager generally appointed by the client and can vary from project phase to phase.

4.3. Technological Aspect

BIM-based tools enable users to create models comprised parametric objects [81] and carry out specific task applications to provide the desired outcome. These task applications include, but are not limited to, model generation, cost estimation, energy analysis, planning and scheduling, and visualization. The tool output is either standalone or exported to other tool applications for further analysis. Autodesk Revit is the most widely used BIM authoring tool because it provides reasonably consistent BIM standards and third-party development support [96]. However, tool selection depends on availability, accessibility, choice, ease of use, and project nature. A tool is also chosen based on cross-platform compatibility and active community support [97].

BIM can improve construction worker safety training, design for safety (DfS), pre-task planning, job hazard analysis, accident investigation, and facility and maintenance phase safety [98]. Using BIM-based technologies for safety training and hazard detection may result in fewer claims, lower workers’ compensation premiums, lower costs, fewer delays, improved collaboration between designers and contractors, improved employee morale, and increased productivity. Practical safety training improves worker competence and understanding regarding hazard identification and control, resulting in fewer job site incidents. BIM enables new artisans to gain a more complete and rapid understanding of their working environment. Construction safety professionals can use BIM to provide DfS suggestions because it offers exceptional visualization. Pre-task planning provides the most significant opportunity for BIM to improve construction safety. By virtually inspecting the elements to be constructed, construction workers can more easily identify potential hazards and control measures, allowing the task to be accomplished more quickly and safely. Additionally, BIM can be used to ascertain the underlying causes of accidents, on-the-job injuries, and property damage to prevent recurrences. The primary elements that made up the technological aspect are explained in the following subsections.

4.3.1. BIM Execution Plan

A BIM execution plan should be prepared by the project requirements at the start. The lead designer is responsible for preparing the BIM execution plan at the design stage. This specifies the project’s deliverables and gives implementation specifics that the project team can use throughout the BIM-based project. Additionally, it supports the client and project team in documenting the project’s agreed-upon BIM deliverables and processes.

4.3.2. BIM Information Flow

Information flow management is a crucial issue in the AEC industry. The information flow is critical for any BIM-based project because nothing can be started without sharing any information among the project team members [99]. For any BIM-based project, the success criterion is how data is managed among them [100]. Only with a well-defined information flow between the project stakeholders can a BIM-based project be more successful [101]. Building a BIM model is contingent upon inputting coherent data from the relevant stakeholders. BIM information flow is a term that refers to structured data flow facilitated by technical methods for BIM modelling or by the implementation of BIM to accomplish project management goals such as resource and deliverables planning, decision making, schedule and cost control, and collaborative working [102]. The information flow supports the modelling process directly, including information and data, data paths and channels, software, and building information modules. BIM implementation should be linked to the deliverables and objectives of the project [103].

Employer information requirements (EIR) are considered before establishing the project deliverables with the designers throughout the design stage. BIM consultants should be involved in the EIR preparation, especially if the client has little knowledge about construction and BIM [104]. The design team provides the initial development of BIM models with their respective drawings based on EIR. In BIM-based projects, information is pooled and exchanged transparently among users. The technology creates an accessible platform for each project member, allowing for greater alignment of decision-making and feedback mechanisms among stakeholders while also improving traditional data management [105]. The primary means of ensuring an organized data collection in a BIM-assisted project is establishing a common data environment (CDE) [106]. BIM facilitates sharing information about proposed designs, allowing diverse design teams to work more readily in a common CDE. It enables users to analyse the impact of changes on the overall design more realistically and in real-time [107].

A project team must create and implement a comprehensive plan for any collaborative and information exchange to work successfully. The information flow shown in Figure 2 indicates how data should be exchanged among the client, design team, contractor, safety officer, and workers for construction workers’ safety training and job hazard identification at the design stage. The design phase starts by developing the architectural drawings, whether a building project or equivalent, using the client’s information, preliminary site investigation, and the planning authority’s input. The CDE can share data between the design team, contractor, safety officer, and construction workers. The concepts by the design team are implemented in a BIM environment, resulting in full information models integrated into a single global model. The CDE enables two-way information sharing between the many design participants in real time and fast updates to the model information following data integration and coordination. The owner can join during the model development stage to provide early feedback on the design criteria, as the deliverables can be taken from the information models.

4.3.3. BIM Model Chain

In the integrated modelling process, the model chain illustrates a virtual chain of successive evolutions of BIM models through various phases and disciplines [102]. The complexity of the global model becomes obvious when reaching the buildability stage. As shown in Figure 3, the global model receives an architectural model in the case of building projects, a civil/structural model in the case of building or infrastructural developmental projects, and an MEP model, among others. The global model’s models could be many depending on the project deliverables and objectives, and it is the CDE for all the BIM-based projects’ participants. However, integrating the local models into the global model depends on which local model is prioritized.

4.3.4. BIM Workflow Process

BIM unifies the entire workflow, from design through construction and operation. The compatibility of workflows contributes to the success of BIM-based projects [108]. It is the BIM process carried out by project teams and includes inputs and outputs for project management [102]. The input is the local models’ information or data, and the outcome is a functional BIM application. Throughout the project lifespan, project teams rely on the global BIM model to acquire and share information. The global BIM model changes based on the inflow (i.e., from the local models) and outflow of data (i.e., BIM application functional requirement) [109]. Within the BIM process, obtaining comments on the existing model from various design team members makes communication and conflict resolution easier and quicker. Using the global model with the help of the safety and health officer on the contractor’s order, the design team can provide safety training and JHI to the construction workers. Figure 4 shows the BIM workflow process at the design stage.

4.4. Organizational Size

Small and medium-sized companies’ issues are distinct from those of large companies. To adopt and deploy BIM technology, an organization must make a considerable initial investment in software and hardware and personnel training [110]. Larger businesses face fewer barriers to BIM implementation than smaller businesses [111]. Similarly, in Malaysia, small businesses are hesitant to adopt BIM technology due to a lack of skills and knowledge, and they require a significant financial investment to acquire BIM-based tools [110,112]. Many safety-related accidents occur on projects managed by small and medium-sized construction companies [113]. These stated problems could hinder small and medium-sized enterprises’ use of BIM-based tools for safety training, JHI, and other applications. However, funding from the government and trial and affordable software (BIM-based tool) may encourage the application of the proposed framework. Effective use of advanced tools and processes by small and medium-sized businesses and major construction firms can assist project managers in planning and tracking the project’s performance across multiple dimensions [114]. The construction industry’s safety performance has improved dramatically due to innovation in safety equipment, procedures, and training [115].

4.5. Best Practics or Standards

The lack of norms and standards for how BIM should be applied in the construction industry and a lack of BIM awareness are two main obstacles to BIM implementation [116]. A standard code of procedures and rules for BIM is required for standardizing new output and enabling efficient communication and integration among stakeholders [117]. Implementing BIM interface systems entails several technical, administrative, and regulatory considerations [118]. There is a lack of a standard BIM-based framework for construction workers to identify occupational hazards and obtain safety training in the AEC sector. The framework refers to the standards and technical requirements, organizational cultures and guidelines, and policy and legal concerns that all contribute to the successful implementation of BIM. Standards and technical requirements include the current industry standard, level of development or details for the BIM local models, information, and data specifications of the project. BIM standards and guidelines are crucial guiding documents in implementing BIM and outline the processes that need to be built and improved over time. The documents provide the requirements for a standardized procedure for creating, maintaining, and disseminating construction information by BIM. BIM standards and guidelines are online in Finland, Norway, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the USA, Spain, Singapore, Hong Kong, Denmark, and the Netherlands. The selection of the standards depends on the regulatory bodies, organization, and country of origin. Organizational rules and requirements include the roles and responsibilities of the project stakeholders, hierarchical set-up, and workflow process to achieve the BIM-based project deliverables and objectives. The policy and legal issues also include model ownership, access authorization, and contractual agreements. OSHA and DOSH are the safety standards used to obtain the relevant information needed for construction worker safety training and JHI for the identified types of hazards.

4.6. Hazard Characterization

Fall-related accidents made up 37.1% of the 302 fatal accidents analysed in the Malaysian construction industry from 2010 to 2019 [45], and was the only type of incident considered for the framework development. Fall from height is the most common cause of several severe injuries and deaths in the construction sector in many countries worldwide. Working at a height necessitates a risk assessment to establish the appropriate level and type of protection. The following protections should be employed depending on the situation to prevent falls from height hazards on the construction site.

4.6.1. Hole or Opening Cover

According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in the USA and the Department of Safety and Health (DOSH) in Malaysia, a hole is any gap or opening on a floor, roof, or walking/working surface that is at least two inches (i.e., about 0.05 m) horizontally in either direction or more on construction sites and 1.8 m (6 ft) above the ground (see Table 2) with cost implications. The floor hole cover should be sufficiently sturdy and durable to support at least twice the weight of an employee, equipment, and materials that may be imposed on it at any moment. The weight is estimated to be around 90 kg. Additionally, the cover must be larger than the designated aperture, secure against displacement, and clearly labelled as a hazard. Highway and vehicular aisle coverings should be capable of reliably bearing at least twice the axle load of the largest vehicle estimated to cross the cover.

4.6.2. Guardrails

Guardrail systems comprise top rails, middle rails, and other vertical parts and toe boards that prevent kicked-off objects from falling and hurting employees on lower levels of work sites. They are commonly used for walking/working surfaces on construction sites. Table 3 indicates how guardrails or handrails are installed on sites to prevent accidents with cost implications.

• Type A guardrail: The Ultra-Adjust Roof Bracket is designed for varied settings ranging from 26.57 to 53.13 degrees of roof pitch and maximum spacing of roughly 2.4 m. Its representation is shown in Figure 5.

• Type B guardrail: Guardian Parapet Anchors can be used to secure guardrail uprights, as a single point tie-off, or in conjunction with a horizontal rope lifeline. It functions like a single-point tie-off and incorporates a safety pin for secure installation and adjustability, allowing the parapet anchor to fit walls ranging from 100 to 500 mm. The device is reinforced for durability and is rated for about 2268 kg. It is compatible with shock-absorbing lanyards and is retractable. As illustrated in Figure 6, the Parapet Anchor System features broad, easy-to-grip adjustment handles for speedy set-up and proper securement.

• Type C guardrail: Guardian Angel Guardrail Boot is a cost-effective method to increase the stability and support of a guardrail system. It is constructed of a high-strength, resilient bright orange material that withstands the most challenging working conditions while keeping good visibility even in the dark, as shown in Figure 7. It is suitable for home and commercial settings and features an integrated toe board slot for ease of installation. It is simple to apply, attaches to wood and concrete surfaces, and is reusable for various installation applications.

• Type D guardrail: The C-Slab Grabber is ideal for guardrail installation on concrete decking (see Figure 8). It incorporates a quick-adjust handle, an anti-slip grip, and a safety pin that ensures the system’s integrity. The C-Slab Grabber is quickly installed and adapts to accommodate concrete slabs between 37.5 to 900 mm thick. It is compatible with 2 × 4” and 2 × 6” toe boards or cables and is exceptionally resistant to corrosion and damage due to its rugged build. It is also made of powder-coated and galvanized steel.

• Type E guardrail: The parapet clamp guardrail system is a height-adjustable system that provides contractors with a cost-effective and simple-to-use solution. The weight of the adjustable bracket and the guardrail post is only 8.6 kg. Each design comprises a clamp for the parapet and a guardrail post compatible with 2 × 4” boards, as shown in Figure 9. This system is suitable for parapets ranging in width from 100 to 600 mm, and a whole system may be erected quickly by one person, frequently without ladders or scaffolding.

• Type F guardrail: Metal gussets secure the railing to the deck, while a nail secures the bottom of the guardrail to the deck’s side (see Figure 10). Gussets are a low-cost and straightforward technique to add railing to a timber construction set-up, and the components are made of galvanized steel and installed with screws or nails. This system is compatible with guardrail posts measuring 1300 mm, 1625 mm, or 1850 mm. If the Guardrail Standard Gusset Mount is not damaged, it can be used as many times as possible; however, new fasteners must always be used with each new installation application.

• Type G guardrail: The Horizontal Under-eave Guard System (HUGS) is a passive rooftop fall safety system built on trusses (see Figure 11). HUGS guardrails are compatible with most wood or metal trusses and set the industry standard for rooftop fall safety. HUGS delivers the most continuous fall protection, from sheathing to roofing. Their patented guardrails attach beneath the roof’s eave, eliminating the need for guardrail penetration and preventing future roof leaks or difficulties. HUGS are simple to install and remove, allowing one to reuse them multiple times, saving time and money. HUGS guardrail systems protect roofing teams more than nets or harnesses and do not restrict worker movement. HUGS is the only roof-mounted safety railing system that enables total roof replacement. From roof tear-off to completed roof.

4.6.3. Safety Nets

Safety nets are used on work sites to safeguard persons or items from falling on the ground [119]. They are often employed to protect workers 25 feet above ground level or in other places where ladders, scaffolds, catch platforms, temporary flooring, safety lines, or safety belts are unsuitable. Safety nets serve as excellent fall arrest solutions when fall protection and mobility flexibility are required. They are flexible plastic nets made from raw materials such as high-density polyethylene (HDPE). They are a suitable fall protection method for holes, open-sided floors, catch working/walking surfaces, and steel/concrete erection. They are frequently utilised in regions with wide-open areas or lengthy leading edges that expose employees to a significant risk of falling. Nets can also provide fall protection on the exterior and interior of under-construction buildings. One should always check the tension and clearance of the safety net to ensure that a falling person does not encounter any surface or structure below the safety net. Any hot work above a safety net should be avoided because it could damage or perforate it. One should avoid accumulating trash or waste because these might compromise the integrity of the safety netting and add additional weight.

Safety nets should be stored in a dry, shaded area while not in use to avoid degradation. Frequently, personnel safety nets and debris nets are used together. Smaller mesh nets capture minor detritus, while larger and stronger nets capture employees. Safety nets should be used when fall prevention measures such as guardrails and hole covers that prevent workers from falling in the first place are deemed unfeasible. Table 4 indicates how safety nets should be installed on sites to avoid fatal accidents.

• Debris/shade/scaffolding safety nets: Debris nets collect construction materials (scraps, nails, tools, and falling bricks) to keep them from hurting employees or passers-by below. They are robust and heavy-duty plastic netting designed to be used atop scaffolding to protect pedestrians and traffic from falling debris. They are also suitable for air circulation and significantly lower rain and wind penetration, providing protection from the sun (resistant to UV rays) and extreme heat, and enhancing the working environment for construction workers. They are also used to provide shade to construction workers. The basic fact is that shade netting for construction is required when the nature of the work results in dust creation in the workplace and hassles for populated areas nearby. These mentioned advantages could lead to optimization of work hours by the construction workers. They may be repurposed for various building projects and are easily stored between usage. Figure 12 shows how debris nets are used to prevent fatal accidents.

• Fall protection safety nets: Workers who work near an unprotected or leading-edge may be at risk of falling if no fall protection mechanism is in place. Falls from such heights usually result in serious injuries or death. The risk of injury from falling to a lower level is reduced by using safety nets, which are designed to entrap a worker in a net and stop their fall. When no other means of preventing a fall from a height are available, fall safety nets or guard nets are used to protect someone. Safety nets are a type of passive fall protection designed to catch a worker after they fall, preventing them from hitting the surface below and injuring themselves. They protect workers without making any deliberate or conscious effort. Active fall protection systems, such as personal fall arrest systems, on the other hand, necessitate the worker maintaining ongoing awareness and active engagement to ensure the fall system provides adequate protection. Safety nets are strategically placed around elevated work areas to catch workers who fall from the site. Figure 13 depicts how fall protection nets are used on construction sites.

4.6.4. Personal Fall Arrest System (PFAS)

A fall arrest system is a device designed to interrupt a falling worker’s fall. It is the final line of defence for people whose jobs place them in danger of falling. A fall arrest system is always advised when working at an elevated height of 1.8 m. Harness lanyards are employed when working at the height of 1.8 m (6 feet) or more above a lower level. [120]. A suitable body-holding device, such as a harness, a fall energy-absorbing element, an anchor line, an anchor point, connecting equipment, snap hooks, grab wires, and energy-absorbing or self-retracting lanyards comprise a PFAS. The safety lanyard is attached to a harness, which holds an anchor device attached to a structural element and a shock-absorbing connection assembly, which absorbs the wearer’s kinetic energy as it falls to the floor. PFAS must not be used in conjunction with guardrail systems or hoists. If it is connected to the hoist areas, however, it must be wired to restrict the employee’s movement to the perimeter of the walking/working surface.

Anchorage is the initial phase in the development of a fall arrest system. It is defined as a fixed structural component, such as a beam, girder, column, or floor that can withstand the forces applied during the process. Anchors provide secure attachment places for horizontal or vertical lines, lanyards, and other equipment used to support the weights produced by a fall. They are frequently required to sustain at least twice the impact force of a falling worker. They can also be permanent or temporary and vary in size and shape depending on the situation to select and use the appropriate one. The component that securely connects the connecting device to the anchorage is referred to as a “anchoring connector”. A beam anchor, cross-arm strap, D-bolt, hook anchor, or tripod could all be components of the system. It could also be a tripod, davit, or any other link used to attach lifelines, lanyards, or deceleration tools.

The connecting subsystem is critical in connecting the body wear and the anchorage/anchorage connector. It could be an energy-absorbing lanyard, a fall arrester, a retractable lanyard, a rope grabber, or a recovery device. Three types of lanyards exist (shock-absorbing, self-retracting, and positioning lanyards) [121]. The connection method will vary depending on whether the worker is equipped with PFA or restricted work posture and travel. Frequently, the connection is made using a cord equipped that absorbs energy after a fall. Self-retracting lifelines and shock absorbers reduce fall distance and energy. A shock absorber should be used only while working above, and the maximum length should be 1.75 m.

The full-body harness is the only type of bodywear allowed for fall arrest, and it is chosen by the nature of the work and the work environment. A full-body harness spreads the force of stopping a fall over the shoulders, thighs, and pelvis. It has a centre-back fall arrest attachment and D-rings for worker positioning, fall prevention, suspension, or ladder climbing. On full-body harnesses, the front D-rings are allocated for ladder-type fall arrestors, work positioning, travel restraint, and rescue. The D-rings on the sides, on the other hand, are just for positioning.

A body belt is a belt that is worn around the waist and is used to position workers and protect them from falling. It may contain D-rings on the hips and mid-back, but it is never meant to be utilised to stop a fall. Body belts, harnesses, and other relevant components must be utilised solely for employee protection and not to hoist materials. When utilised with a body belt, PFAS shall have a maximum arresting force of 4 kN applied to an employee. Additionally, when used with a body harness, the system’s full arresting power on an employee shall be limited to 8 kN. It must be built in such a way that no employee can fall more than six feet (1.8 m) or encounter any lower level. PFAS must completely stop an employee and restrict the employee’s maximum deceleration distance to 1.07 m. It must also bear double the impact energy of an employee falling 1.8 m or the system’s maximum free fall distance, whichever is less. The system is considered safe if an employee’s total person and tool weight does not exceed 140 kg. A six-foot worker wearing a six-foot lanyard should not exceed a total fall distance of 18.5 feet when an accident happens. A worker who has fallen and is suspended by a PFAS is not necessarily safe from injury. Suspension trauma is a potentially fatal illness that can happen to workers in this situation. It is caused by the increased pressure on the heart that comes from being suspended in the air. People who are hanging should be rescued right away and slowly lowered to the ground to avoid cardiac arrest.

A positioning device system is a belt or harness that allows an employee to lean against a wall while working hands-free. For example, construction workers can lean back by attaching their body belts or harnesses to the rebar and work with their two hands. It secures them in position so they can operate with both hands. A simple lanyard comprising rope, web, or wire rope serves as the linking device for positioning and restricting travel. Additionally, these may contain specific positioning assemblies made of chain or web for rebar operations. All positioning systems are designed to keep free fall to a maximum of fewer than two feet (600 mm). Positioning devices must also be anchored to a structure that can bear at least twice the possible impact load of an employee’s fall, or 13.3 kN, whichever is greater. The length of restraint lanyards is chosen to keep the user from reaching a fall hazard zone. Extra D-Rings are included on work positioning harnesses to accommodate operation in these conditions. Before each use, positioning device systems must be inspected for wear, damage, and degradation. Defective components must be removed. Table 5 indicates how PFAS are installed on sites to avoid falls from height. Examples of PFAS components are shown in Figure 14.

4.7. Framework Validation

The framework’s validation process identifies whether the research objective has been met. The proposed framework was validated through semi-structured interviews with the relevant industry professionals. Complex and non-quantitative models can be verified through interviews, utilizing qualitative methods to demonstrate the model’s strengths and limitations [122]. The framework was assessed in terms of generality (overview), completeness (comprehensiveness), comprehension (understanding), content (inclusiveness), connection (framework components), practicality (usefulness), and probable acceptance in the construction industry. The study collected input from the relevant experts establishes the framework’s validity. The participants include those from academia and the industry in construction management. The total number of professionals for the semi-structured interview was 19, eight academics and eleven from the industry. The participants were selected based on their knowledge of safety training, JHI, and BIM. Their views provide an opportunity to examine and scrutinize the framework. The semi-structured interviews included open-ended and closed-ended questions. The validation information obtained from the participants is presented in Table 6. The professionals interviewed expressed satisfaction with the framework’s overall structure and components and its application to BIM-based projects for construction worker safety training and JHI.

The framework was classed as the result of comprehensive and well-defined underlying relationships. The interviewees agreed that the framework had good coverage of topics connected to construction workers’ safety training and JHI. The interviewees also approved that the framework can effectively promote BIM for the construction workers’ safety training and JHI to reduce the number of fatal accidents on the job site. They also accepted a need for advanced safety training and JHI to tackle the shortcomings of the conventional one. The following are some of the interviewees’ comments:

• “A computationalmodel should be developed and tested with a small group of construction workers,” the water resources and environmental engineer stated.

• “Possibly consider a localization process for different geographical regions, countries, and levels of project exposure,” the construction project manager stated.

• “I consider this proposed framework is good enough to start applying it as an advanced approach to safety training and job hazard identification,” stated the safety and health officer.

• “Under human aspect, the contractor (safety officer and Construction workers), I think construction workers emotional quotient (EQ) is of importance in achieving a successful safety training and job hazard identification“ stated a civil engineer.

This study utilised the similarity confirmation method suggested by Zhuang, et al. [123], which was based on the conventional 5-point Likert scale-based questionnaire for the proposed framework. A non-parametric statistical test (Kruskal–Wallis H test) was utilised to confirm reliability. The interviewees were asked to rate the proposed framework assessment indicators on a five-point Likert scale, where 5—excellent, 4—good, 3—fair, 2—poor, 1—very poor. Table 7 shows that all p-values are larger than 0.05, indicating no statistically significant differences. We presume their feedback matches the result. The Chi-Square (χ2) critical value of 28.869 (at p = 0.05 and df =18) is more significant than the estimated H values for all framework assessment indicators. Interviewees’ feedback did not differ statistically.

5. Conclusions

A conceptual framework for BIM process flow was developed based on an integrative review approach and other empirical findings. The essence of the framework is to aid in comprehensive safety training and JHI for construction workers at the design stage. The issue is that the conventional safety training and JHI are insufficient, and there is a need for improvement or advanced methods. The developed method may solve the traditional method’s shortcomings by providing a close-to-reality environment for construction workers’ safety training and JHI. The framework simplifies how construction stakeholders should utilise BIM to advance safety training and JHI at the design stage. The framework was validated through semi-structured interviews and has six primary essential components: human aspect, technological part, organizational size, hazard characterization, best practices or standards, and nature of the project. The validation procedure was designed to determine the framework’s appropriateness. The potential for social and interpersonal interaction made the interview a good choice for validation. The developed framework is easy to understand by the relevant stakeholders. All the participants considered the proposed framework very important in providing better safety training and JHI to construction workers at the design stage. The following points summarize the framework’s primary benefits based on validation.

• It explains the role and functions of each stakeholder for construction safety and JHI using BIM.

• It highlights the critical challenges during construction workers’ safety training and JHI in the BIM process flow.

• It could be suitable for an integrated project delivery procurement system.

• It is easier to implement; however, implementation depends on company finances.

• The shortcomings of the conventional method of safety training and JHI may be overcome by adopting the developed framework.

• The framework enables reasonable manipulation of ideas during the decision-making process.

The novel contribution to practice is a one-of-a-kind assessment that aims to acquire information primarily through the outcomes of that work. The contribution to practice results in new operationally relevant information for that field. This research makes a unique contribution to the industry in the following areas:

• This research recommends practical enhancements, innovation, and adjustments to the construction of employees’ safety training and JHI. One of the suggested framework’s research advantages is that it evolved through expert validation and contains the necessary components to facilitate practical construction safety training and JHI. These components could serve as a starting point for developing guidelines for practical safety training and JHI.

• Construction organizations are expected to benefit from the developed framework as it will allow them to provide practical and advanced safety training and JHI and reduce fatal construction accidents.

• The proposed framework is easy to understand and apply in providing practical construction safety training and JHI. However, there is a money implication beyond the scope of this study.

• The research findings would increase the safety and health culture and performance in design and the construction processes in Malaysia if utilised.

• The study findings would also be valuable to BIM experts to understand better where to improve safety management using BIM-based tools or processes.

• It would also increase the early collaboration of the project stakeholders.

• It would also enhance the socio-economic benefits of the project development.

• The developed framework would help safety officers train workers in the 3D virtual environment for easy understanding.

• The study concludes that the application of advanced methods of safety training and JHI by Malaysian construction stakeholders is still in its infancy; their application can therefore be considered as helping to future proof the industry.

There is a need for organizations’ strategic plans, especially small and medium-sized companies, to change from the conventional method of construction safety and JHI to an advanced one. This may require much capital to do so, but a worker’s life is worth more than the money spent on the advanced method of safety training and JHI. It is irrefutable that the kind of safety training JHI given to construction workers affects the projects’ efficiency and productivity. CIDB Malaysia and other relevant organizations should ensure that construction organizations are aware, trained, and adopt a new method of safety training and JHI to reduce fatal accidents.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.D.R. and N.S.; data curation, A.D.R.; formal analysis, A.D.R.; funding acquisition, I.O.; investigation, A.D.R.; methodology, A.D.R., N.S. and I.O.; project administration, N.S. and I.O.; supervision, N.S. and I.O.; validation, A.D.R., N.S. and I.O.; writing—original draft, A.D.R.; writing—review & editing, A.D.R., N.S. and I.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their utmost gratitude to the YUTP, grant number YUTP-FRG 1/2022 (015LC0-405) for funding this research, and to the University Tecknologi PETRONAS.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures and Tables

Generate image description

Figure 1. A conceptual framework for BIM process flow for construction workers’ safety training and JHI.

Generate image description

Figure 2. Information flow for worker safety training and JHI at the design stage.

Generate image description

Figure 3. BIM model chain (Adapted from Ma, et al. [102]).

Generate image description

Figure 4. BIM model chain.

Generate image description

Figure 5. Ultra-adjust roof bracket guardrail.

Generate image description

Figure 6. Guardian parapet anchor system.

Generate image description

Figure 7. Angel guardrail boot system.

Generate image description

Figure 8. C-Slab grabber system.

Generate image description

Figure 9. Parapet clamp guardrail system.

Generate image description

Figure 10. Metal gusset system.

Generate image description

Figure 11. HUGS under-eave truss mounted guardrail system.

Generate image description

Figure 12. Debris/shade/scaffolding safety nets.

Generate image description

Figure 13. Fall protection safety nets.

Generate image description

Figure 14. PFAS components.

Table 1

Application of BIM-based Tools.

S/No	Application	Brief Description	References
1	Existing conditioning modelling	Is a procedure in which a project team generates a 3D model of the existing site circumstances using BIM modelling software, 3D laser scanning tools, and traditional surveying equipment, among others.	[46,47]
2	3D presentation	BIM 3D presentations provide a realistic representation of the future building or structure, project cost, detailed information, and the quality and quantity of the objects, materials, or services that comprise the building or facility.	[48]
4	Planning and scheduling	This determines the sequences, time, prices, materials, human resources, equipment, or machines required to create, renovate, or demolish a building or structure. BIM allows for the integration of information from planning and scheduling into a 3D interactive model, resulting in a 4D or nD model.	[49,50]
5	Design and analysis of the design options	Throughout the project life cycle, this enables visualization, helping the study of design alternatives and the analysis of data. The ability of BIM-based technologies to examine multiple design alternatives to select the optimal solution during the pre-construction stage promotes project team communication and collaboration. They can also enable users to retrieve, synthesize, and compute data in a real-world setting and compare options.	[51,52,53]
6	Cost estimation and quantity take-off	These are performed during the pre-construction stage to assess whether the project cost is within the specified budget to avoid adjustments throughout the construction phase. Accurate cost calculations are instant with a BIM-based tool if the required data is incorporated into the model with minimal effort and time.	[54,55]
7	Site analysis	This is one of the most valuable and essential ways to establish a complete framework to aid in the most acceptable design selections. It is accomplished by examining the features of a proposed site with BIM modelling software, geographic information system (GIS), drones, and other related tools to establish the best site location for future development.	[56,57]
8	Energy simulation, also known as energy modelling	This is a computer-based, systematic procedure used to evaluate the energy performance of a building or facility and make it more energy efficient by modifying its design before construction.	[58]
9	Other performance simulations	Analyses of lighting, daylighting, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), sun and shadow patterns, airflow, carbon footprints, solar radiation, and sustainability performance are just a few examples.	[59,60,61,62]

Table 2

Hole cover installation.

Type of hazard	Hole or opening
Consequences	Trip, fall, falling of construction objects or materials
Standards	Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), (1926.502(i))Department of Safety and Health (DOSH)—Malaysia, (JKKP DP/G 127/379/4-35: MARCH 2007, Section 3)
Size	Two inches (i.e., about 0.05 m) or more horizontally in either direction on a floor, roof, or walking/working surface
Condition	If the hole or opening is 1.8 m (6 ft) above the ground
Preventive measures	Use cover if the opening is 0.05, but not more than 0.25 m; otherwise, use guard rails or safety nets.
Load	The cover should be sturdy and durable to support at least a 90 kg load for building construction. However, the load estimate depends on the vehicle’s axle loads for road construction.
Material	The cover is usually made of flat wood or metal capable of vertically carrying at least 90 kg load.
Color code	The cover should be labeled as a hazard with a recognizable color.
Cost of metal cover	Cost of metal cover per 0.25 m2 = 11.500$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 1.725$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 5.750$Total cost to cover 0.25 m × 0.25 m hole = 18.975$
Cost of wooden cover	Cost of wooden cover per 0.25 m2 = 8.070$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 1.211$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 4.035$Total cost to cover 0.25 m × 0.25 m hole = 13.316$
Procedure	The cover should be at least twice the size of the hole or opening and be placed at the center, secured from any displacement.

Table 3

Guardrail installation.

Type of hazard	Edge of a structure or scaffold or roof or hole or opening, working at height
Consequences	The trip, fall from height
Standards	Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), (1926.502(b))Department of Safety and Health (DOSH)—Malaysia, (JKKP DP/G 127/379/4-35: MARCH 2007, section 3 & 5)
Size	The height of the guardrail should be at least 0.9 m or 1.1 m. Top rails and mid-rails should have a nominal diameter or thickness of at least one-quarter inch (0.6 cm) to avoid cuts and lacerations.
Condition	If the edge is 1.8 m (6 ft) above the ground
Preventive measures	Guardrails or handrails are required once the height of any task is 1.8 m or more so long as the area is large enough to use them.
Load	Guardrail systems must withstand a weight of at least 90 kg that is put on them in any direction and at any point along the leading edge. Additionally, the guardrail’s top edge shall not deflect below 1.0 m above the walking/working level when the load is applied downward. However, the mid-rail should withstand a load of 68 kg in any direction, irrespective of the materials used.
Material	Guardrails are usually made of wood, metal (round pipe—alloy steel), manila, plastic, or synthetic rope capable of withstanding at least 90 kg load when applied horizontally.
Color code	The guardrails should be labeled as a hazard with high-visibility materials.
Cost (Type A)	Cost of wood (2 × 4) per 2.44 m × 3 = 216.00$Cost of Ultra-Adjust Roof Bracket × 2 = 339.56$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 83.33$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 277.78$Total cost = 916.674$
Cost (Type B)	Cost of wood (2 × 4) per 2.44 m × 3 = 216.00$Cost of Guardian Parapet Anchor System × 2 = 883.06$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 164.86$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 549.53$Total cost = 1813.45$
Cost (Type C)	Cost of wood (2 × 4) per 2.44 m × 3 = 216.00$Cost of wood (4 × 4) per 1.1 m × 2 = 31.77$Cost of Angel Guardrail Boot × 2 = 81.00$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 49.32$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 164.39$Total cost = 510.71$
Cost (Type D)	Cost of wood (2 × 4) per 2.44 m × 3 = 216.00$Cost of C-Slab Grabber × 2 = 160.00$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 56.40$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 188.00$Total cost = 620.40$
Cost (Type E)	Cost of wood (2 × 4) per 2.44 m × 3 = 216.00$Cost of Parapet Clamp × 2 = 360.00$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 86.40$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 288.00$Total cost = 950.40$
Cost (Type F)	Cost of wood (2 × 4) per 2.44 m × 3 = 216.00$Cost of Metal Gusset System (65” Universal Guardrail Post) × 2 = 118.44$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 50.17$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 167.22$Total cost = 551.83$
Cost (Type G)	Cost of wood (2 × 4) per 2.44 m × 3 = 216.00$Cost of HUGS Under-Eave Truss Mounted Guardrail × 2 = 291.18$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 76.08$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 253.59$Total cost = 836.85$
Procedure	The guardrails are installed at the edge of the slab or hole and secured from any displacement depending on the temporary rail utilised.

Table 4

Safety nets installation.

Type of hazard	Opening or edge, work at height
Consequences	Trip, fall, falling of construction objects or materials
Standards	Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), (1926.502(c))Department of Safety and Health (DOSH)—Malaysia, (JKKP DP/G 127/379/4-35: MARCH 2007, section 7)
Size	Each safety net mesh aperture shall not exceed 36 square inches (230 cm) in size or be longer than 6 inches (15 cm) on either side and shall not be longer than 6 inches (15 cm) measured center-to-center of mesh ropes or webbing (15 cm). All mesh crossings shall be fastened to prevent the mesh aperture from enlarging.
Conditions	Safety nets shall be put as close to the walking/working surface as possible, but not more than 9.1 m below such level. If the vertical working distance is equal to 1.524 m, then the outermost horizontal projection of the safety net should be about 2.438 m. If the vertical working distance is more than 1.524 m but not more than 3.048 m, then the outermost horizontal projection of the safety net should be about 3.048 m. If the vertical working distance is more than 3.048 m, then the outermost horizontal projection of the safety net should be about 3.962 m. The netting should be placed such that no gap more than 100 mm between the netting’s edge and the structure exists. The overlap should be at least one meter when overlapping safety nets are used. At least once a week, safety nets should be inspected for wear, damage, and other degradation. They should also be inspected following any incidence that could jeopardize their integrity. Defective components must be withdrawn from service. Materials, scrap pieces, equipment, and tools that have fallen into the safety net must be removed immediately and at least before the start of the following work shift.
Preventive measures	Vertically position the safety net to protect against plaster, stone, construction equipment, or other objects that could fall from the scaffolding and injure people or property. Use it horizontally to ensure the protection of the falling workers and prevent construction materials/objects from harming workers underneath.
Load	When subjected to an impact load of 180 kg of sand, safety nets should be erected with sufficient clearance to avoid collision with the surface or structures below 750 mm plus or minus 50 mm. A webbing border rope should surround each safety net (or section thereof) with a minimum breaking strength of 22.2 kN
Material	Safety nets are flexible plastic nets made of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) raw materials and other similar materials.
Color code	The safety nets should be labeled as a hazard with high-visibility materials.
Debris/shade/scaffolding safety net	Cost of 3.048 m × 6.096 m net = 227.50$Cost of 6 mm (minimum breaking strength = 5.00 kN, safe load = 211.08 kg) rope per 20 linear meters = 11.60$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 35.87$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 119.55$Total cost = 394.52$
Fall protection safety net	Cost of 1.524 m × 3.048 m net = 192.50$Cost of 25 mm pipe per 12 linear meters = 428.88$Cost of couplers (12 number) = 37.20$Cost of safety snap hook (6 number–120 × 11 mm, load capacity = 450 kg) = 15.72$Cost of 16 mm (minimum breaking strength = 24.80 kN, safe load = 211.08 kg) rope per 20 linear meters = 11.60$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 102.89$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 342.95$Total cost = 1131.74$
Procedure	Cables should be used to secure the safety netting around the perimeters of the supporting structure. One should ascertain that the supporting structure is stable and inflexible and provides appropriate support for fastening the nets. Rather than connecting the netting directly to the support structure, one should secure it with a cord. One should ascertain that the ground is clear of any obstructions that could lessen the distance to the ground or prevent the mesh from stretching fully in the event of a fall. Net installation demands meticulous preparation. Aerial lifts, personal fall arrest equipment, or a unique restraint system must be used to safeguard workers installing and removing safety or debris nets from fall hazards.

Table 5

PFAS installation.

Type of hazard	Hole or opening, work at height
Consequences	A trip, falling of construction worker
Standards	Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), (1926.502(d), (e))Department of Safety and Health (DOSH)—Malaysia, (JKKP DP/G 127/379/4-35: MARCH 2007, section 8)
Size	PFAs come in different sizes depending on the manufacturer and kind of usage. Belt straps of the body harness or bet must be at least 41 mm wide.
Condition	The safety net can be used for any hole above 1.8 m (6 ft) on construction sites. Anchorages should be designed, installed, and utilised in conjunction with a comprehensive PFAS that maintains a safety factor of at least two and is supervised by a certified person. Corrosion-resistant connectors should be used, and all surfaces and edges should be smooth to prevent harm to the system’s interface components. Lifelines must have a minimum tensile strength equal to a 60 mm (5/8 inch”) diameter polypropylene fibre rope and contain ultraviolet inhibitors to extend the material’s outdoor life. On suspended scaffolds or similar work platforms equipped with horizontal lifelines that can be converted to vertical lifelines, the mechanisms connecting to the horizontal lifeline must be capable of locking in both configurations. Horizontal or vertical lifelines must be designed, constructed, and utilised under the supervision of a trained individual as a component of an overall PFAS with a minimum safety factor of two. A minimum of three bull-dog clamps is required to connect the end of the lifeline with a minimum of 45 mm spacing between them. Lifelines must be securely attached to the anchorage point and protected against wear or damage along their length. The distance between two posts on a lifeline should be 6–8 m.
Preventive measures	The connection technique will differ based on whether the worker has a personal fall arrest or is restricted in their work posture and travel. The connection is frequently achieved using a lanyard containing an energy-absorbing material that reduces the energy supplied to the user’s body following a fall.
Load	Anchorage point to secure PFAs should be a structure capable of supporting 2270 kg per worker attached. Lanyards and vertical lifelines must have a minimum breaking strength of 2270 kg, and each employee must be tied to a different lifeline when vertical lifelines are employed. However, in constructing shaft elevators, two workers can use one vertical lifeline provided its minimum breaking strength is 4540 kg, and they are in the false car with the guardrails. Energy-absorbing or self-retracting lanyards and lifelines that automatically reduce the free fall distance to 0.61 m or less should be capable of withstanding a minimum tensile load of 1360 kg applied to the device fully extended state. Those that do not limit free fall to 0.61 m or less must sustain a 2270 kg tensile load when fully stretched. D-rings and snap hooks that have been proof-tested to a minimum tensile force of 16 kN without cracking, fracturing, or incurring irreversible deformation should be utilised. Minimum tensile strength of 22.2 kN shall be required for all connecting assemblies.
Material	Synthetic fibres shall be utilised for ropes and straps (webbing) used in lanyards, lifelines, and components of body belts and body harnesses. Connectors or rings shall be manufactured of steel that has been drop forged, pressed, shaped, or equivalent material.
Colour code	It does not matter so long as the PFAS components serve the purpose. There are various colours in the market currently.
Cost (general fall arrest)	Anchorage = Support structure usually found on-site.Anchorage connector Anchor sling (6-foot) = 50.00$ I-beam trolley (Minimum flange width = 3 inches) = 353.78$ Other anchorage connector = N/A Body support (full body harness) = 234.38$Connection means Energy-absorbing or self-retracting lanyard (6-foot, 140 kg) = 220.16$ Horizontal Lifeline (100 ft, tensile strength = 2270 kg) = 1100.78$ Bulldog clamps (6 pieces) = 9.00$ Fall arrester (8–16 mm) = 30.00$ Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 299.72$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 999.05$Total cost = 3296.87$
Cost (work position)	Anchorage = Support structure like a horizontal/vertical reinforcementBody support (full body harness or body belts with D-rings) = 234.38$Connection means Anchor bolt (1 per worker, tensile strength = 2270 kg) = 85.00$ Trolley = N/A Lanyard with double rebar snap hooks/alloy steel carabiner = 34.20$ Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 53.04$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 176.79$Total cost = 583.41$
Cost (restraint)	Anchorage = Support structure Anchorage connector Anchor sling (6-foot) = 50.00$ Roof anchor system (6 pieces/100 ft @ 6 m interval, 2270 kg) = 139.16$ Body support (full body harness or body belt with mounted D-ring) = 234.38$Connection means Positioning lanyard = 34.20$ Horizontal Lifeline (100 ft, tensile strength = 2270 kg) = 1100.78$ Bulldog clamps (6 pieces) = 9.00$ Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 235.19$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 783.76$Total cost = 2586.47$
Cost (Suspension/worker riding system)	Anchorage = Support structure Anchorage connector Anchor sling (6-foot) = 50.00$ Adjustable tripod or davit (overall height = 2.5 m) = 8404.80$ Body support (full body harness) = 234.38$Connection means Energy-absorbing or self-retracting lanyard (6-foot, 140 kg) = 220.16$ Vertical lifeline ascender/descender (100 ft, 140 kg) = 168.01$ Back-up vertical lifeline with rope grab = 380.17$ Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 1418.63$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 4728.76$Total cost = 15,604.91$
Cost (ladder climbing)	Anchorage = Support structure Anchorage connector Energy-absorbing or self-retracting lanyard (6-foot, 140 kg) = 220.16$ Vertical lifeline ascender/descender (100 ft, 140 kg) = 168.01$ Rope grabber = 212.16$ Fall arrester (8–16 mm) = 30.00$ Body support (full body harness equipped with front or hip D-rings) = 234.38$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 129.71$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 432.36$Total cost = 1426.78$
Cost (retrieval/rescues)	Anchorage = Support structure Anchorage connector Anchor sling (6-foot) = 50.00$ Adjustable tripod or davit (overall height = 2.5 m) = 8404.80$ Body support (full body harness) = 234.38$Energy-absorbing or self-retracting lanyard (6-foot, 140 kg) = 220.16$Cost of transportation (10–15% of the initial cost) = 1336.40$Cost of installation/uninstallation (30–50% of the initial cost) = 4454.67$Total cost = 14,700.41$
Procedure	PFAS must be inspected for wear, damage, and other degradation before each use, with defective components removed from service. A safety lanyard secures an anchor device to a structural element and a shock-absorbing connection assembly to reduce the wearer’s kinetic energy when falling. PFAS and components subjected to impact loading must be removed from service immediately and should not be utilised for employee protection until inspected and determined to be undamaged and acceptable for reuse by a competent person. In the event of a fall, employers are obligated to either quickly respond and rescue workers or provide training in self-rescue techniques.

Table 6

Information obtained from the interviewees.

Group	S/No	Specialization	Level of Education	Years of Working Experience	Years of BIM Experience	Framework Assessment Indicators (FAI)
						Overview	Comprehension	Completeness	Assessment	Content	Connection of the Critical Components	Practicality	Recommendation
Industry professionals	1	Construction manager	Ph.D.	10	2	4	4	5	4	4	5	Yes	Yes
	2	Civil engineer	MSc.	15	4	5	5	4	5	4	5	Yes	Yes
	3	Structural engineer	MSc.	15	3	4	4	3	4	4	4	Yes	Yes
	4	Construction engineer	Diploma	15	-	4	4	4	4	4	4	Yes	Yes
	5	Construction engineer	Diploma	2	-	5	3	4	5	4	3	Yes	Yes
	6	Civil engineer	MSc.	6	2	5	4	4	4	5	4	Yes	Yes
	7	Construction manager	Diploma	13	-	3	4	4	4	3	4	Yes	Yes
	8	Construction project manager	Ph.D.	15	7	5	4	4	5	5	4	Yes	Yes
	9	Safety and health officer	MSc.	6	2	5	4	4	4	4	4	Yes	Yes
	10	Safety and health officer	MSc.	4	-	5	4	5	5	5	5	Yes	Yes
	11	Civil engineer	MSc.	10	5	4	4	4	4	4	4	Yes	Yes
Mean score						4.45	4.00	4.09	4.36	4.18	4.18
Academics	1	Geotechnical engineer	MSc.	8	-	5	4	5	5	5	5	Yes	Yes
	2	Construction manager	Ph.D.	8	1	5	5	5	5	5	5	Yes	Yes
	3	Civil engineer	MSc.	3	-	3	4	5	4	5	5	Yes	Yes
	4	Process simulation engineer	Ph.D.	7	-	4	5	3	4	4	4	Yes	Yes
	5	Civil Engineer	MSc.	8	3	5	4	4	5	5	4	Yes	Yes
	6	Geotech engineer	MSc.	3	2	3	3	4	3	4	3	Yes	Yes
	7	Water resources and environmental engineer	Ph.D.	12	4	4	4	5	4	4	5	Yes	Yes
	8	Civil engineer	MSc.	8	1	5	4	5	4	5	4	Yes	Yes
Mean score						4.25	4.12	4.50	4.25	4.63	4.38
Overall mean score						4.37	4.05	4.26	4.32	4.37	4.26

Note: Scale legend for the framework assessment indicators: 5—excellent, 4—good, 3—fair, 2—poor, 1—very poor.

Table 7

Kruskal–Wallis H test.

	FAI1	FAI2	FAI3	FAI4	FAI5	FAI6
Kruskal–Wallis H	18.000	18.000	18.000	18.000	18.000	18.000
Degree of freedom (df)	18	18	18	18	18	18
Asymp. Sig.	0.456	0.456	0.456	0.456	0.456	0.456

Key: FAI₁ = Overview, FAI₂ = Comprehension, FAI₃ = Completeness, FAI₄ = Assessment, FAI₅ = Content, FAI₆ = Connection of the critical components.

References

1. Park, C.S.; Kim, H.J. A framework for construction safety management and visualization system. Autom. Constr.; 2013; 33, pp. 95-103. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.012]

2. Tam, C.; Zeng, S.; Deng, Z. Identifying elements of poor construction safety management in China. Saf. Sci.; 2004; 42, pp. 569-586. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2003.09.001]

3. Li, X.; Yi, W.; Chi, H.L.; Wang, X.; Chan, A.P. A critical review of virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) applications in construction safety. Autom. Constr.; 2018; 86, pp. 150-162. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.11.003]

4. Teo, E.A.L.; Ling, F.Y.Y.; Chong, A.F.W. Framework for project managers to manage construction safety. Int. J. Proj. Manag.; 2005; 23, pp. 329-341. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.09.001]

5. Lucas, J.; Thabet, W. Implementation and evaluation of a VR task-based training tool for conveyor belt safety training. ITcon; 2008; 13, 638.

6. Ho, C.L.; Dzeng, R.J. Construction safety training via e-Learning: Learning effectiveness and user satisfaction. Comput. Educ.; 2010; 55, pp. 858-867. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.017]

7. Rodríguez-Garzón, I.; Lucas-Ruiz, V.; Martínez-Fiestas, M.; Delgado-Padial, A. Association between perceived risk and training in the construction industry. J. Constr. Eng.; 2015; 141, 04014095. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000960]

8. Zhang, S.; Teizer, J.; Lee, J.K.; Eastman, C.M.; Venugopal, M. Building information modeling (BIM) and safety: Automatic safety checking of construction models and schedules. Autom. Constr.; 2013; 29, pp. 183-195. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.05.006]

9. Bahn, S. Workplace hazard identification and management: The case of an underground mining operation. Saf. Sci.; 2013; 57, pp. 129-137. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.01.010]

10. Choe, S.; Leite, F. Construction safety planning: Site-specific temporal and spatial information integration. Autom. Constr.; 2017; 84, pp. 335-344. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.09.007]

11. Zuluaga, C.M.; Namian, M.; Albert, A. Impact of training methods on hazard recognition and risk perception in construction. Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress; San Juan, Puerto Rico, 31 May–2 June 2016; pp. 2861-2871.

12. Guo, H.; Yu, Y.; Skitmore, M. Visualization technology-based construction safety management: A review. Autom. Constr.; 2017; 73, pp. 135-144. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.10.004]

13. Demirkesen, S.; Arditi, D. Construction safety personnel’s perceptions of safety training practices. Int. J. Proj.; 2015; 33, pp. 1160-1169. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.01.007]

14. Han, S.H.; Park, S.H.; Jin, E.J.; Kim, H.; Seong, Y.K. Critical issues and possible solutions for motivating foreign construction workers. J. Manag. Eng.; 2008; 24, pp. 217-226. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2008)24:4(217)]

15. Dai, J.; Goodrum, P.M. Differences in perspectives regarding labor productivity between Spanish-and English-speaking craft workers. J. Constr. Eng.; 2011; 137, pp. 689-697. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000329]

16. Kukoyi, P.O.; Adebowale, O.J. Impediments to Construction Safety Improvement. J. Eng. Proj. Prod. Manag.; 2021; 11, pp. 207-214.

17. Zacchei, E.; Molina, J.L. Reviewing arch-dams’ building risk reduction through a sustainability–safety management approach. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 392. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12010392]

18. Marhavilas, P.; Koulouriotis, D.; Nikolaou, I.; Tsotoulidou, S. International occupational health and safety management-systems standards as a frame for the sustainability: Mapping the territory. Sustainability; 2018; 10, 3663. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su10103663]

19. Loushine, T.W.; Hoonakker, P.L.; Carayon, P.; Smith, M.J. Quality and safety management in construction. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell.; 2006; 17, pp. 1171-1212. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783360600750469]

20. Gunduz, M.; Almuajebh, M. Critical success factors for sustainable construction project management. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 1990. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12051990]

21. Tahmasebinia, F.; Sepasgozar, S.M.; Shirowzhan, S.; Niemela, M.; Tripp, A.; Nagabhyrava, S.; Alonso-Marroquin, F. Criteria development for sustainable construction manufacturing in Construction Industry 4.0: Theoretical and laboratory investigations. Constr. Innov.; 2020; 20, pp. 379-400. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/CI-10-2019-0103]

22. Udomsap, A.D.; Hallinger, P. A bibliometric review of research on sustainable construction, 1994–2018. J. Clean. Prod.; 2020; 254, 120073. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120073]

23. Liwång, H. Safety management module to create social sustainability skills. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ.; 2020; 21, pp. 717-732. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-09-2019-0264]

24. Grote, G. Safety management in different high-risk domains–all the same?. Saf. Sci.; 2012; 50, pp. 1983-1992. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.07.017]

25. Hinze, J.; Godfrey, R.; Sullivan, J. Integration of construction worker safety and health in assessment of sustainable construction. J. Constr. Eng.; 2013; 139, 594. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000651]

26. Boileau, P.E. Sustainability and prevention in occupational health and safety. Ind. Health; 2016; 54, pp. 293-295. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.54-293]

27. Schulte, P.A.; McKernan, L.T.; Heidel, D.S.; Okun, A.H.; Dotson, G.S.; Lentz, T.J.; Geraci, C.L.; Heckel, P.E.; Branche, C.M. Occupational safety and health, green chemistry, and sustainability: A review of areas of convergence. Environ. Health.; 2013; 12, 31. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-12-31]

28. Li, H.; Lu, M.; Chan, G.; Skitmore, M. Proactive training system for safe and efficient precast installation. Autom. Constr.; 2015; 49, pp. 163-174. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.10.010]

29. Uddin, S.; Albert, A.; Alsharef, A.; Pandit, B.; Patil, Y.; Nnaji, C. Hazard Recognition Patterns Demonstrated by Construction Workers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2020; 17, 7788. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217788]

30. Choe, S.; Leite, F. Assessing safety risk among different construction trades: Quantitative approach. J. Constr. Eng.; 2017; 143, 04016133. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001237]

31. Edirisinghe, R.; London, K. Comparative analysis of international and national level BIM standardization efforts and BIM adoption. Proceedings of the 32nd CIB W78 Conference; Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 27–29 October 2015; pp. 149-158.

32. Martínez-Aires, M.D.; López-Alonso, M.; Martínez-Rojas, M. Building information modeling and safety management: A systematic review. Saf. Sci.; 2018; 101, pp. 11-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.08.015]

33. Bentley, T.A. Investigating risk factors for slips, trips and falls in New Zealand residential construction using incident-centred and incident-independent methods. Ergonomics; 2006; 49, pp. 62-77. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140130612331392236] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16393804]

34. Buskin, S.E.; Paulozzi, L.J. Fatal injuries in the construction industry in Washington State. Am. J. Ind. Med.; 1987; 11, pp. 453-460. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajim.4700110408]

35. Hu, K.; Rahmandad, H.; Smith-Jackson, T.; Winchester, W. Factors influencing the risk of falls in the construction industry: A review of the evidence. Constr. Manag. Econ.; 2011; 29, pp. 397-416. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2011.558104]

36. Zhang, M.; Fang, D. A cognitive analysis of why Chinese scaffolders do not use safety harnesses in construction. Constr. Manag. Econ.; 2013; 31, pp. 207-222. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2013.764000]

37. Safe Work Australia. Managing the Risk of Faffs in Housing Construction (Code of Practice). 2019; Available online: https://www.safework.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/52157/Managing-the-risk-of-falls-in-housing-construction-COP.pdf (accessed on 25 October 2021).

38. Im, H.J.; Kwon, Y.J.; Kim, S.G.; Kim, Y.K.; Ju, Y.S.; Lee, H.P. The characteristics of fatal occupational injuries in Korea’s construction industry, 1997–2004. Saf. Sci.; 2009; 47, pp. 1159-1162. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2008.11.008]

39. Malaysia’s Construction Industry Has Highest Fatality Rate. Available online: https://www.theborneopost.com/2018/07/13/malaysias-construction-industry-has-highest-fatality-rate/ (accessed on 10 November 2021).

40. Rafindadi, A.D.; Napiah, M.; Othman, I.; Alarifi, H.; Musa, U.; Muhammad, M. Significant factors that influence the use and non-use of personal protective equipment (PPE) on construction sites—Supervisors’ perspective. Ain Shams Eng. J.; 2022; 13, 101619. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2021.10.014]

41. Hanapi, N.M.; Kamal, M.M.M.; Ismail, M.I.; Abdullah, I.A.P. Identifying root causes and mitigation measures of construction fall accidents. Gading J. Soc. Sci.; 2013; 17, pp. 65-79.

42. Huang, X.; Hinze, J. Analysis of construction worker fall accidents. J. Constr. Eng.; 2003; 29, pp. 262-271. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2003)129:3(262)]

43. Haslam, R.A.; Hide, S.A.; Gibb, A.G.; Gyi, D.E.; Pavitt, T.; Atkinson, S.; Duff, A.R. Contributing factors in construction accidents. Appl. Ergon.; 2005; 36, pp. 401-415. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2004.12.002]

44. Chi, C.F.; Wu, M.L. Fatal occupational injuries in Taiwan—relationship between fatality rate and age. Saf. Sci.; 1997; 27, pp. 1-17. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(97)00046-5]

45. Rafindadi, A.D.; Napiah, M.; Othman, I.; Mikić, M.; Haruna, A.; Alarifi, H.; Al-Ashmori, Y.Y. Analysis of the causes and preventive measures of fatal fall-related accidents in the construction industry. Ain Shams Eng. J.; 2022; 13, 101712. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2022.101712]

46. Matos, R.; Rodrigues, F.; Rodrigues, H.; Costa, A. Building condition assessment supported by Building Information Modelling. J. Build. Eng.; 2021; 38, 102186. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102186]

47. van den Berg, M.; Voordijk, H.; Adriaanse, A. BIM uses for deconstruction: An activity-theoretical perspective on reorganising end-of-life practices. Constr. Manag. Econ.; 2021; 39, pp. 323-339. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2021.1876894]

48. Ma, Y.-P. Extending 3D-GIS District Models and BIM-Based Building Models into Computer Gaming Environment for Better Workflow of Cultural Heritage Conservation. Appl. Sci.; 2021; 11, 2101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app11052101]

49. Nawaz, A.; Su, X.; Nasir, I.M. BIM Adoption and its impact on planning and scheduling influencing mega plan projects-(CPEC-) quantitative approach. Complexity; 2021; 2021, 8818296. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/8818296]

50. Amer, F.; Koh, H.Y.; Golparvar-Fard, M. Automated Methods and Systems for Construction Planning and Scheduling: Critical Review of Three Decades of Research. J. Constr. Eng.; 2021; 147, 03121002. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002093]

51. Mattern, H.; König, M. BIM-based modeling and management of design options at early planning phases. Adv. Eng. Inform.; 2018; 38, pp. 316-329. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2018.08.007]

52. Hamidavi, T.; Abrishami, S.; Hosseini, M.R. Towards intelligent structural design of buildings: A BIM-based solution. J. Build. Eng.; 2020; 32, 101685. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101685]

53. Khan, A.; Sepasgozar, S.; Liu, T.; Yu, R. Integration of BIM and immersive technologies for AEC: A scientometric-SWOT analysis and critical content review. Buildings; 2021; 11, 126. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030126]

54. Naneva, A.; Bonanomi, M.; Hollberg, A.; Habert, G.; Hall, D. Integrated BIM-based LCA for the entire building process using an existing structure for cost estimation in the Swiss context. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 3748. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12093748]

55. Hasan, A.N.; Rasheed, S.M. The benefits of and challenges to implement 5D BIM in construction industry. Civ. Eng. J.; 2019; 5, 412. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.28991/cej-2019-03091255]

56. Rojas, M.J.; Herrera, R.F.; Mourgues, C.; Ponz-Tienda, J.L.; Alarcon, L.F.; Pellicer, E. BIM use assessment (BUA) tool for characterizing the application levels of BIM uses for the planning and design of construction projects. Adv. Civ.; 2019; 2019, 9094254. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9094254]

57. Bortolini, R.; Formoso, C.T.; Viana, D.D. Site logistics planning and control for engineer-to-order prefabricated building systems using BIM 4D modeling. Autom. Constr.; 2019; 98, pp. 248-264. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.11.031]

58. Schlueter, A.; Geyer, P. Linking BIM and Design of Experiments to balance architectural and technical design factors for energy performance. Autom. Constr.; 2018; 86, pp. 33-43. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.10.021]

59. Azhar, S.; Carlton, W.A.; Olsen, D.; Ahmad, I. Building information modeling for sustainable design and LEED® rating analysis. Auto. Constr.; 2011; 20, pp. 217-224. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.019]

60. Díaz-Vilariño, L.; Lagüela, S.; Armesto, J.; Arias, P. Indoor daylight simulation performed on automatically generated as-built 3D models. Energy Build.; 2014; 68, pp. 54-62. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.02.064]

61. Bank, L.C.; Thompson, B.P.; McCarthy, M. Decision-making tools for evaluating the impact of materials selection on the carbon footprint of buildings. Carbon Manag.; 2011; 2, pp. 431-441. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4155/cmt.11.33]

62. Jin, R.; Zhong, B.; Ma, L.; Hashemi, A.; Ding, L. Integrating BIM with building performance analysis in project life-cycle. Autom. Constr.; 2019; 106, 102861. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.102861]

63. Volk, R.; Stengel, J.; Schultmann, F. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for existing buildings—Literature review and future needs. Autom. Constr.; 2014; 38, pp. 109-127. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.10.023]

64. Getuli, V.; Ventura, S.M.; Capone, P.; Ciribini, A.L. BIM-based code checking for construction health and safety. Procedia Eng.; 2017; 196, pp. 454-461. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.224]

65. Khoshnava, S.; Ahankoob, A.; Preece, C.; Rostami, R. Application of BIM in construction safety. Proceedings of the Management in Construction Research Association (MiCRA)—Postgraduate Conference; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 5–6 December 2012.

66. Ahn, S.; Kim, T.; Park, Y.J.; Kim, J.M. Improving Effectiveness of Safety Training at Construction Worksite Using 3D BIM Simulation. Adv. Civ.; 2020; 2020, 2473138. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2473138]

67. Clevenger, C.; Lopez del Puerto, C.; Glick, S. Interactive BIM-enabled Safety Training Piloted in Construction Education. Adv. Eng. Educ.; 2015; 4, n3.

68. Shen, X.; Marks, E. Near-miss information visualization tool in BIM for construction safety. J. Constr. Eng.; 2016; 142, 04015100. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001100]

69. Sacks, R.; Perlman, A.; Barak, R. Construction safety training using immersive virtual reality. Constr. Manag. Econ.; 2013; 31, pp. 1005-1017. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2013.828844]

70. Clevenger, C.; Lopez Del Puerto, C.; Glick, S. Developing a BIM-enabled bilingual safety training module for the construction industry. Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2014: Construction in a Global Network; Atlanta, GA, USA, 19–21 May 2014; pp. 1792-1800.

71. Zhou, W.; Whyte, J.; Sacks, R. Construction safety and digital design: A review. Autom. Constr.; 2012; 22, pp. 102-111. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2011.07.005]

72. Tran, S.V.T.; Khan, N.; Lee, D.; Park, C. A Hazard Identification Approach of Integrating 4D BIM and Accident Case Analysis of Spatial–Temporal Exposure. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 2211. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13042211]

73. Zhang, S.; Sulankivi, K.; Kiviniemi, M.; Romo, I.; Eastman, C.M.; Teizer, J. BIM-based fall hazard identification and prevention in construction safety planning. Saf. Sci.; 2015; 72, pp. 31-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.08.001]

74. Hongling, G.; Yantao, Y.; Weisheng, Z.; Yan, L. BIM and safety rules based automated identification of unsafe design factors in construction. Procedia Eng.; 2016; 164, pp. 467-472. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.646]

75. Hossain, M.A.; Abbott, E.L.; Chua, D.K.; Nguyen, T.Q.; Goh, Y.M. Design-for-safety knowledge library for BIM-integrated safety risk reviews. Autom. Constr.; 2018; 94, pp. 290-302. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.07.010]

76. Kim, K.; Cho, Y.; Zhang, S. Integrating work sequences and temporary structures into safety planning: Automated scaffolding-related safety hazard identification and prevention in BIM. Autom. Constr.; 2016; 70, pp. 128-1426. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.06.012]

77. Alizadehsalehi, S.; Asnafi, M.; Yitmen, I.; Celik, T. UAS-BIM based real-time hazard identification and safety monitoring of construction projects. Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Construction Economics and Organization; Göteborg, Sweden, 13–14 June 2017; Volume 13, 22.

78. Kirs, P.J.; Sanders, G.L.; Cerveny, R.P.; Robey, D. An experimental validation of the Gorry and Scott Morton framework. MiS Q.; 1989; 13, pp. 183-197. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/248926]

79. Cohen, L.; Manion, L.; Morrison, K. The ethics of educational and social research. Research Methods in Education; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2013; pp. 99-128.

80. Patton, M.Q. Qualitative Research; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2005.

81. Eastman, C.M.; Eastman, C.; Teicholz, P.; Sacks, R.; Liston, K. BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011.

82. Fulford, R.; Standing, C. Construction industry productivity and the potential for collaborative practice. Int. J. Proj.; 2014; 32, pp. 315-326. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.05.007]

83. Schaufelberger, J.E.; Holm, L. Management of Construction Projects: A Constructor’s Perspective; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2017.

84. Carter, T.; Keeler, A. Life-cycle cost–benefit analysis of extensive vegetated roof systems. J. Environ. Manag.; 2008; 87, pp. 350-363. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.024] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17368704]

85. Yue, Y.; Xiahou, X.; Li, Q. Critical Factors of Promoting Design for Safety in China’s Subway Engineering Industry. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2020; 17, 3373. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103373] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32408687]

86. Wetzel, E.M.; Thabet, W.Y. The use of a BIM-based framework to support safe facility management processes. Autom. Constr.; 2015; 60, pp. 12-24. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.09.004]

87. Vitharana, V.; De Silva, S.; De Silva, G. Health Hazards, Risk and Safety Practices in Construction Sites-a Review Study. Eng. J. Inst. Eng.; 2015; 48, 35. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4038/engineer.v48i3.6840]

88. Fang, D.; Zhao, C.; Zhang, M. A cognitive model of construction workers’ unsafe behaviors. J. Constr. Eng.; 2016; 142, 04016039. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001118]

89. Enshassi, A. Factors Affecting Safety on Construction Projects; Islamic University of Gaza: Gaza Strip, Palestine, 2003.

90. Adoption of BIM Model in Malaysia Slow. Available online: https://www.propertyguru.com.my/property-news/2018/8/174096/adoption-of-bim-model-in-malaysia-slow (accessed on 26 May 2021).

91. Pollack, J.; Helm, J.; Adler, D. What is the Iron Triangle, and how has it changed?. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus.; 2018; 11, pp. 527-547. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-09-2017-0107]

92. Halpin, D.W.; Lucko, G.; Senior, B.A. Construction Management; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2017.

93. Jobidon, G.; Lemieux, P.; Beauregard, R. Building Information Modeling in Quebec’s Procurement for Public Infrastructure: A Case for Integrated Project Delivery. Laws; 2021; 10, 43. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/laws10020043]

94. Kvirenc, P.; Bouska, R. Case study: BIM protocol for Skanska (Czech Republic). Bus. IT; 2017; 7, pp. 8-13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14311/bit.2017.01.02]

95. Kassem, M.; Succar, B. Macro BIM adoption: Comparative market analysis. Autom. Constr.; 2017; 81, pp. 286-299. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.04.005]

96. Edwards, G.; Li, H.; Wang, B. BIM based collaborative and interactive design process using computer game engine for general end-users. Vis. Eng.; 2015; 3, 4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40327-015-0018-2]

97. Sidani, A.; Dinis, F.M.; Sanhudo, L.; Duarte, J.; Baptista, J.S.; Martins, J.P.; Soeiro, A. Recent tools and techniques of BIM-based virtual reality: A systematic review. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng.; 2021; 28, pp. 449-462. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09386-0]

98. Rajendran, S.; Clarke, B. Building Information Modeling: Safety benefits & opportunities. Prof. Saf.; 2011; 56, pp. 44-51.

99. Le, P.L.; Elmughrabi, W.; Dao, T.M.; Chaabane, A. Present focuses and future directions of decision-making in construction supply chain management: A systematic review. Int. J. Constr. Manag.; 2020; 20, pp. 490-509. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2018.1488089]

100. Abanda, F.; Mzyece, D.; Oti, A.; Manjia, M. A study of the potential of cloud/mobile BIM for the management of construction projects. Appl. Syst. Innov.; 2018; 1, 9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/asi1020009]

101. Ho, S.P.; Tserng, H.P.; Jan, S.H. Enhancing knowledge sharing management using BIM technology in construction. Sci. World J.; 2013; 2013, 170498. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/170498]

102. Ma, X.; Xiong, F.; Olawumi, T.O.; Dong, N.; Chan, A.P. Conceptual framework and roadmap approach for integrating BIM into lifecycle project management. J. Manag. Eng.; 2018; 34, 05018011. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000647]

103. Ahn, Y.H.; Kwak, Y.H.; Suk, S.J. Contractors’ transformation strategies for adopting building information modeling. J. Manag. Eng.; 2016; 32, 05015005. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000390]

104. Rathnasinghe, A.; Kulatunga, U.; Jayasena, H.; Wijewickrama, M. Information flows in a BIM enabled construction project: Developing an information flow model. Intell. Build. Int.; 2020; 14, pp. 190-206. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17508975.2020.1848783]

105. Demian, P.; Walters, D. The advantages of information management through building information modelling. Constr. Manag. Econ.; 2014; 32, pp. 1153-1165. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2013.777754]

106. Siebelink, S.; Voordijk, J.T.; Adriaanse, A. Developing and testing a tool to evaluate BIM maturity: Sectoral analysis in the Dutch construction industry. J. Constr. Eng.; 2018; 144, 05018007. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001527]

107. Al Hattab, M.; Hamzeh, F. Information flow comparison between traditional and BIM-based projects in the design phase. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction; Fortaleza, Brazil, 29 July–2 August 2013; pp. 761-770.

108. Sacks, R.; Korb, S.; Barak, R. Building Lean, Building BIM: Improving Construction the Tidhar Way; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2017.

109. Porwal, A.; Hewage, K.N. Building Information Modeling (BIM) partnering framework for public construction projects. Autom. Constr.; 2013; 31, pp. 204-214. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.12.004]

110. Morrison, C. BIM 2010: The Benefits and Barriers for Construction Contractors in Auckland. 2010; Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/10652/1778 (accessed on 2 November 2021).

111. Ramilo, R.; Embi, M.R.; Datta, S. Building Information Modelling: Challenges and Barriers Among Architectural Practices. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2018.

112. Latiffi, A.A.; Mohd, S.; Kasim, N.; Fathi, M.S. Building information modeling (BIM) application in Malaysian construction industry. Int. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.; 2013; 2, pp. 1-6.

113. Gunduz, M.; Laitinen, H. A 10-step safety management framework for construction small and medium-sized enterprises. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon.; 2017; 23, pp. 353-359. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2016.1200258]

114. Sekar, G.; Sambasivan, M.; Viswanathan, K. Does size of construction firms matter? Impact of project-factors and organization-factors on project performance. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag.; 2020; 11, pp. 174-194. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-07-2020-0118]

115. Esmaeili, B.; Hallowell, M.R. Diffusion of safety innovations in the construction industry. J. Constr. Eng.; 2012; 138, pp. 955-963. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000499]

116. Ahmed, S. Barriers to implementation of building information modeling (BIM) to the construction industry: A review. J. Civ. Eng. Constr.; 2018; 7, pp. 107-113. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32732/jcec.2018.7.2.107]

117. Haron, N.A.; Raja Soh, R.P.Z.A.; Harun, A.N. Implementation of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in Malaysia: A Review. Pertanika J. Sci. Technol.; 2017; 25, pp. 661-674.

118. Singh, V.; Gu, N.; Wang, X. A theoretical framework of a BIM-based multi-disciplinary collaboration platform. Autom. Constr.; 2011; 20, pp. 134-144. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011]

119. Construction Safety Net. Available online: https://wnragro.com/construction-safety-net/ (accessed on 16 October 2021).

120. Baszczyński, K. Effects of full body harness design on fall arrest performance. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon.; 2020; 27, pp. 938-945. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2020.1807720] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32900281]

121. Epp, R.J. Update-Myths and Misconceptions in Fall Protection. Proceedings of the ASSE Professional Development Conference; Orlando, FL, USA, 24–27 June 2007; American Society of Safety Engineers: Orlando, FL, USA, 2007.

122. Smith, J.K. Quantitative versus qualitative research: An attempt to clarify the issue. Educ. Res.; 1983; 12, pp. 6-13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X012003006]

123. Zhuang, Z.Y.; Su, C.R.; Chang, S.C. The effectiveness of IF-MADM (intuitionistic-fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making) for group decisions: Methods and an empirical assessment for the selection of a senior centre. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ.; 2019; 25, pp. 322-364. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/tede.2019.8399]