Comparison of in-flight measures with predictions of a bio-mathematical fatigue model.

David M C Powell, Mick B Spencer, Keith J Petrie
{"title":"Comparison of in-flight measures with predictions of a bio-mathematical fatigue model.","authors":"David M C Powell,&nbsp;Mick B Spencer,&nbsp;Keith J Petrie","doi":"10.3357/ASEM.3806.2014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Bio-mathematical models are increasingly used for predicting fatigue in airline operations, and have been proposed as a possible component of fatigue risk management systems (FRMS). There is a need to continue to evaluate fatigue models against data collected from crews conducting commercial flight operations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comparison was made between several in-flight studies of pilot fatigue, conducted over a 10-yr period on a variety of operations, and the predictions of a widely used bio-mathematical model, the System for Aircrew Fatigue Evaluation (SAFE). The in-flight studies collected a variety of subjective ratings as well as reaction time on a performance task.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall correlation between observed and predicted fatigue was stronger for subjective fatigue than reaction time. More detailed analysis on selected studies shows discrepancies between predicted and observed fatigue, which may be explained by a variety of confounders. Closer analysis of the duty time, time of day, and schedule length show discrepancies of up to 15% between observed and predicted fatigue.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This study provides comparison between the predictions of one bio-mathematical model, SAFE, and observed fatigue measures across a number of operations. Possible causes of discrepancies are discussed. There is potential for more comparison studies of this type with the various available models.</p>","PeriodicalId":8676,"journal":{"name":"Aviation, space, and environmental medicine","volume":"85 12","pages":"1177-84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3357/ASEM.3806.2014","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aviation, space, and environmental medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3357/ASEM.3806.2014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Introduction: Bio-mathematical models are increasingly used for predicting fatigue in airline operations, and have been proposed as a possible component of fatigue risk management systems (FRMS). There is a need to continue to evaluate fatigue models against data collected from crews conducting commercial flight operations.

Methods: A comparison was made between several in-flight studies of pilot fatigue, conducted over a 10-yr period on a variety of operations, and the predictions of a widely used bio-mathematical model, the System for Aircrew Fatigue Evaluation (SAFE). The in-flight studies collected a variety of subjective ratings as well as reaction time on a performance task.

Results: Overall correlation between observed and predicted fatigue was stronger for subjective fatigue than reaction time. More detailed analysis on selected studies shows discrepancies between predicted and observed fatigue, which may be explained by a variety of confounders. Closer analysis of the duty time, time of day, and schedule length show discrepancies of up to 15% between observed and predicted fatigue.

Discussion: This study provides comparison between the predictions of one bio-mathematical model, SAFE, and observed fatigue measures across a number of operations. Possible causes of discrepancies are discussed. There is potential for more comparison studies of this type with the various available models.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
飞行测量与生物数学疲劳模型预测的比较。
生物数学模型越来越多地用于预测航空公司运营中的疲劳,并被提议作为疲劳风险管理系统(FRMS)的可能组成部分。有必要根据从进行商业飞行操作的机组人员收集的数据继续评估疲劳模型。方法:对飞行员疲劳的几项飞行研究进行了比较,这些研究是在10年的时间里进行的,涉及各种操作,以及广泛使用的生物数学模型——机组人员疲劳评估系统(SAFE)的预测。飞行中的研究收集了各种主观评分以及对执行任务的反应时间。结果:主观疲劳观察值与预测值之间的总体相关性强于反应时间。对选定研究的更详细的分析表明,预测和观察到的疲劳之间存在差异,这可能是由各种混杂因素解释的。仔细分析工作时间,一天中的时间和计划长度,发现观察到的和预测的疲劳之间的差异高达15%。讨论:本研究提供了一种生物数学模型SAFE的预测结果与观察到的疲劳测量结果之间的比较。讨论了产生差异的可能原因。这类研究有可能与现有的各种模型进行更多的比较研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Aviation, space, and environmental medicine
Aviation, space, and environmental medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
1 months
期刊最新文献
Chronic bacterial prostatitis. Carpe diem. Temperature changes in selected areas of body surface induced by systemic cryostimulation. Comparison of in-flight measures with predictions of a bio-mathematical fatigue model. Demographic and occupational predictors of neck pain in pilots: analysis and multinational comparison.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1