Occupational injury trends in the Canadian workforce: An examination of the Canadian community health survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that various factors including the type of occupation, employment status, and level of education have significant associations with the rates of occupational injuries. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of demographics, such as age and gender, and various occupational factors on the rate of occupational injuries for a 14-year period from 2001 to 2014 and to study the differences in trends over time. METHODS: The Canadian Community Health Survey data for 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009-2014 was used to examine the impact of various occupational factors on workplace injuries in the Canadian population. Various inclusion criteria such as age, employment type, and status were applied to select the final sample. The logistic regression was performed using StataMP 11 to determine the association between the rate of occupational injuries and the factors being considered. RESULTS: Rates of injuries occurring at the workplace are associated with various occupational health factors, including, the type of occupation, level of education, the number of injuries sustained, and the employment status. CONCLUSION: The findings may be used by researchers and practitioners to address the impact of occupational injuries in the workforce, and to identify and resolve the factors that result in a high rate of workplace injuries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".