Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Job hazard analysis (JHA, also called job safety analysis, JSA), pre-task planning, Take 5 cards and safe work method statements (SWMS) are widely mandated in construction, but it is unclear whether they prevent injuries. Existing reviews do not isolate them: the Cochrane review of construction injury interventions found most recommended measures unevaluated, and the Campbell review of workplace accident prevention did not separate JHA or safe work procedures. Critical safety scholarship also questions whether paperwork-based hazard analysis improves safety or only produces auditable “safety work”. This review therefore separates the effect of anticipatory hazard analysis from its documentation, and looks for the implementation conditions under which benefit appears. To the authors’ knowledge it would be the first systematic review of implementation studies on these controls in construction. Objectives and review questions The review addresses three questions. 1. What is the effect of implementing, or improving the quality of, JHA/JSA, pre-task planning and safe work procedures on injury and incident outcomes among construction workers? 2. What is their effect on proximal mechanisms: hazard identification, pre-job planning quality, hazard control during work and safe behaviour? 3. Which implementation factors explain variation in effectiveness?
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yankah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: