How to Distinguish Between Suicides and Accidental Deaths in Railway Infrastructure

Background: A key indicator in the safety management of railway infrastructure is the number of accidental deaths. One of the challenges associated with this indicator is the difficulty of excluding suicides. Railway-employed accident investigators do not have access to medical records or forensic evidence, and hence they typically rely on the conclusion from a police investigation to categorize a death as suicide. However, these investigations are sometimes inconclusive, are often slow, and are conducted on a case-by-case basis without reference to historical or national data. Aim: This study seeks to improve the classification of railway fatalities by identifying indicators that can aid in differentiating between suicides and accidental deaths, thereby enhancing the precision and timeliness of safety reporting. Data and Method: The analysis draws on data from a national railway incident report system containing case descriptions with witness accounts. A thematic analysis was conducted on 359 reports of suicides and attempted suicides over a 29-year period. Results: The study identifies two sets of behavioral indicators that may aid in differentiating suicides from accidental deaths-clear and ambiguous indicators. These indicators offer a more systematic and efficient approach to classification than current practices in European railways. Implications: The findings provide a practical guide for both accident and police investigators, enabling faster and more reliable categorization of railway fatalities. This contributes to improved data-driven safety management.

Keywords: Accident investigation, accident classification, suicide classification, behavioral indicators, accident investigation methods, railway safety systems, police investigation, psychological autopsy, forensics, suicide, rail fatalities, railway deaths.