S-92 Gender/sex differences in workers’ compensation for hearing loss, concussions and activity-related soft tissue disorder (ASTDs) in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Novel access to workers’ compensation claims data, in particular disallowed claims and claim eligibility status decisions, was used to inform an evidence need on sex/gender differences in experiences of the workers’ compensation process in British Columbia, Canada. Objectives To conduct a sex/gender stratified analyses of the risk of work-related acute injuries and cumulative disorders, and of the adjudication of the work-relatedness of these injuries and disorders. Methods Compensation claims for ASTDs, concussions and noise-induced hearing loss (2003–17) were analysed for differences between women and men by age-adjusted rates of accepted claims within occupations (ASTDs and concussions only), for ratios of disallowed to accepted claims (ASTDS and hearing loss only), and for time to final claim eligibility decision (ASTDs, concussions and hearing loss). Results We observed higher rates and rates of increase for women compared to men in the same occupations for ASTDs (e.g. 65 versus 43 claims per 1,000 workers for women and men respectively in labourer occupations in processing/manufacturing), and for concussions (e.g. increase from 13 to 25 claims versus from 12 to 16 claims per 1,000 workers for women and men respectively in transportation/equipment operation occupations over the study period). We observed higher ratios of disallowed to accepted claims for women compared to men for ASTDs (1.4 versus 0.5) and hearing loss (4.1 versus 0.4). We observed longer durations to final accepted claim eligibility decisions for women compared to men for ASTDs (e.g. 49 versus 43 days at the 50th percentile) and hearing loss (238 versus 204 days), but not concussions (7 days each). Conclusion The findings warrant further investigation to understand the increased risks of ASTDs and concussions among women compared to men, especially in occupations that have been traditionally male-dominated; and for potential gender/sex biases in the adjudication and recognition of work-related cumulative injuries and disorders among women.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".