A study of Corporate Social Reporting (CSR) on occupational safety and health in Malaysia / Azlina Rahim, Zaharah Abdullah and Zaleha Mahat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the disclosure of Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) in the annual reports of trading, plantation and industry companies listed on the Main Board of Bursa Malaysia. The relevant data were obtained through analysis of annual reports in the Bursa Malaysia library for the year 2003. Out of 304 companies, 44 percent from Trading, 15 percent from Plantation and 41 percent from the Industrial Product sector disclosed OSH information. Most of the companies disclosed the information in a separate section (54 percent) while others in chairman statement (21 percent), stand-alone report (8 percent), operational review (11 percent),dairy or calendar (2 percent) and 4 percent in other section. The most popular aspect of disclosure was workplace safety and health management. This study suggests that, companies disclose the information because they like to demonstrate their commitment in managing and improving OSH within the organization. On the other hand, some of the companies did not disclose because there is no requirement by the Bursa Malaysia or Securities Commission to disclose such information.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".