Jessica Ward, Robert J Reynolds, Erin Connell, Wilma Anton, Avalon Kabeel, Jacqueline M Charvat, Nicholas Nartey, Kristina Marotta, Ahmed Abukmail, Dan M Buckland, Mary Van Baalen, Erik Antonsen
{"title":"人类系统风险评估的证据等级。","authors":"Jessica Ward, Robert J Reynolds, Erin Connell, Wilma Anton, Avalon Kabeel, Jacqueline M Charvat, Nicholas Nartey, Kristina Marotta, Ahmed Abukmail, Dan M Buckland, Mary Van Baalen, Erik Antonsen","doi":"10.1038/s41526-024-00372-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>NASA uses a continuous risk management process to seek out new knowledge of spaceflight-induced risk to human health and performance. The evidence base that informs the risk assessments in this domain is constantly changing as more information is gleaned from a continuous human presence in space and from ongoing research. However, the limitations of this evidence are difficult to characterize because fewer than 700 humans have ever flown in space, and information comes from a variety of sources that span disciplines, including engineering, medicine, food and nutrition, and many other life sciences. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) at NASA is responsible for assessing risk to astronauts and communicating this risk to agency decision-makers. A critical part of that communication is conveying the uncertainty regarding the understanding of the changes that spaceflight induces in human processes and the complex interactions between humans and the spacecraft. Although the strength of evidence grades is common in the academic literature, these scores are often not useful for the problems of human spaceflight. The HSRB continues to update the processes used to report the levels of evidence. This paper describes recent updates to the methods used to assign the level of evidence scores to the official risk postures and to the causal diagrams used by the HSRB.</p>","PeriodicalId":54263,"journal":{"name":"npj Microgravity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10954631/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Levels of evidence for human system risk evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Ward, Robert J Reynolds, Erin Connell, Wilma Anton, Avalon Kabeel, Jacqueline M Charvat, Nicholas Nartey, Kristina Marotta, Ahmed Abukmail, Dan M Buckland, Mary Van Baalen, Erik Antonsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41526-024-00372-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>NASA uses a continuous risk management process to seek out new knowledge of spaceflight-induced risk to human health and performance. The evidence base that informs the risk assessments in this domain is constantly changing as more information is gleaned from a continuous human presence in space and from ongoing research. However, the limitations of this evidence are difficult to characterize because fewer than 700 humans have ever flown in space, and information comes from a variety of sources that span disciplines, including engineering, medicine, food and nutrition, and many other life sciences. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) at NASA is responsible for assessing risk to astronauts and communicating this risk to agency decision-makers. A critical part of that communication is conveying the uncertainty regarding the understanding of the changes that spaceflight induces in human processes and the complex interactions between humans and the spacecraft. Although the strength of evidence grades is common in the academic literature, these scores are often not useful for the problems of human spaceflight. The HSRB continues to update the processes used to report the levels of evidence. This paper describes recent updates to the methods used to assign the level of evidence scores to the official risk postures and to the causal diagrams used by the HSRB.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"npj Microgravity\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10954631/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"npj Microgravity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41526-024-00372-w\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"npj Microgravity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41526-024-00372-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Levels of evidence for human system risk evaluation.
NASA uses a continuous risk management process to seek out new knowledge of spaceflight-induced risk to human health and performance. The evidence base that informs the risk assessments in this domain is constantly changing as more information is gleaned from a continuous human presence in space and from ongoing research. However, the limitations of this evidence are difficult to characterize because fewer than 700 humans have ever flown in space, and information comes from a variety of sources that span disciplines, including engineering, medicine, food and nutrition, and many other life sciences. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) at NASA is responsible for assessing risk to astronauts and communicating this risk to agency decision-makers. A critical part of that communication is conveying the uncertainty regarding the understanding of the changes that spaceflight induces in human processes and the complex interactions between humans and the spacecraft. Although the strength of evidence grades is common in the academic literature, these scores are often not useful for the problems of human spaceflight. The HSRB continues to update the processes used to report the levels of evidence. This paper describes recent updates to the methods used to assign the level of evidence scores to the official risk postures and to the causal diagrams used by the HSRB.
npj MicrogravityPhysics and Astronomy-Physics and Astronomy (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
7.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍:
A new open access, online-only, multidisciplinary research journal, npj Microgravity is dedicated to publishing the most important scientific advances in the life sciences, physical sciences, and engineering fields that are facilitated by spaceflight and analogue platforms.