A five year retrospective analysis of occupational injuries and incidence reported at a research intensive Canadian university
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited information of occupational injury statistics within academic settings exists. Universities and colleges are an important and insightful work environment due to the varied nature of the work performed by employee groups. The objective of this study was to describe occupational injuries for all work groups in a large research intensive university. A retrospective database analysis was conducted on 2029 employee incident reports over a five year period (2000-2004) to determine general and departmental prevalence of injury types, locations, and mechanisms. Demographic analysis revealed an average age of 42 years and 9 years of work experience. Overall, the most frequent injuries were to the hand (40%), were musculoskeletal in nature (42%), and resulted from being "struck or contacted by" (33%). The greatest number of incidents occurred in food services, followed by physical plant and staff services. Closer examination of incidents reported by food services indicated 53% of injuries occurred to the hand and 72% required first aid. Notable too was that 19% of physical plant injuries occurred to the back, but these reports accounted for 40% of total back injuries and 50% of all lost time claims in the total database. Further epidemiological research in academic institutions is needed to better understand the inherent injury risk in this work sector.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".