## 4 Thematic Analysis of the Conducted Review  
This section provides a detailed analysis of the selected papers. In order to clearly present the main thematic areas that are covered by the identified papers, the mind map was developed (Figure 8). Figure 8: The main problems analyzed in the selected papers. Figure 7: Number of most frequently occurring keywords in the analyzed papers. According to the given Figure 8, the main classification based on the four main defined previously groups: human factor, machines, environment, and general. In each of these groups, there were defined the main problems analyzed in the selected papers. The four indicated basic thematic groups are marked in grey. For these groups, characteristic research areas were distinguished, which are repeated in the analyzed articles. For the group _machines_ and _general_, one level of conceptual branches was defined. For example, three thematic subgroups were defined, namely _maintenance accident/safety_, _reliability_, and _methods of risk assessment/analysis_, for the thematic group _machines_. Additionally, for the group _human factor_, there were defined two main subgroups, and in the area of _health and safety_, a second level of conceptual branches was defined. For the last thematic group, _environment_, there were defined up to four conceptual levels. Issues assigned to each of the distinguished conceptual levels were marked with a different shape and different linear connections in order to increase the readiness of the developed map. Furthermore, it should be noted that several of the investigated articles should have been classified in more than one thematic area due to their complexity. Therefore, they were presented on the mind map in all the areas in which they should be classified due to their thematic scope. In addition, in Appendix B, Table A2, their multidisciplinary character was indicated in the column of thematic areas. First, the group that encompasses general issues was analyzed. In this group, six main research problems were identified. A few papers were dedicated to risk assessment (RA) and risk management (RM) issues. In the RM area, papers focused on the problems of mining project risk management [34], or procurement and contract management of construction services [35]. The model for the joint implementation of risk assessment and risk management was presented in [36], where two case studies were provided. Another approach for risk management was given in [37], where the authors, based on the ISO 31000:2009 standard, used and proposed a tool for complex system investigations. Implementation of Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for risk assessment performance was presented in [38; 39]. The first paper was focused on the development of stochastic simulation to quantify uncertainty in mineral deposits and allowing better management of the geological risk during mining scheduling. The second one was focused on the comparison of different correlation approaches on risk analysis associated with uncertain parameters of mining ventures in order to uncover which one would yield the most accurate result. The other research problems in this area regarded risk assessment of agricultural soil contamination [40], safety violations in underground bituminous mines [41], and assessment of the risk of roof falls [42]. Safety issues in the mining sector were under consideration in six papers. The problems investigated in this area regarded multi-method or multi-criteria analyses approach implementation (e.g., [43; 44]) or decision-making modelling use (e.g., [45; 46; 47]). In work [43], safety leadership analysis was performed, adopting a multi-method approach, in which the critical decision method, [PERSON]'s risk management framework and the Accimap method were applied. The fuzzy-VIKOR-based approach for safety and risk assessment in the mining industry was presented in [44].