18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Relationship between Free Press and Under-Reporting of Non-Fatal Occupational Injuries with Data from Representative National Indicators, 2015: Focusing on the Lethality Rate of Occupational Injuries among 39 Countries

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The epidemiology of occupational injuries is reported worldwide, but suspicions of under-reporting prevail, probably associated with free press. We examined the association between freedom of the press and lethality rate of occupational injuries based on the most comprehensive International Labour Organization database on labour statistics (ILOSTAT) among 39 countries. The occupational injury indices, national indicators, and information on freedom of the press in 2015 were sourced from ILOSTAT, World Bank open data, World Health Organization and Freedom House. The lethality rate was the number of fatal occupational injuries per 10,000 total occupational injuries. The relationship among fatal and total occupation injury rates, lethality rate, and national statistics were analysed using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Multivariable linear regression models with bootstrap estimation to manage non-normality determined freedom of the press associated with lethality rate. Freedom of the press was significantly correlated with fatal and total occupational injury rate and lethality rate of occupational injuries. Adjusting for national indicators, only freedom of the press was associated with lethality rate per 10,000 occupational injuries in the report of ILOSTAT. The lethality rate of occupational injury reported by each country might not reflect the actual lethality, but under-reported nonfatal occupational injuries, probably relating to freedom of the press.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Political Economy of Government Responsiveness: Theory and Evidence from India

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Economic burden of occupational injury and illness in the United States.

            The allocation of scarce health care resources requires a knowledge of disease costs. Whereas many studies of a variety of diseases are available, few focus on job-related injuries and illnesses. This article provides estimates of the national costs of occupational injury and illness among civilians in the United States for 2007. This study provides estimates of both the incidence of fatal and nonfatal injuries and nonfatal illnesses and the prevalence of fatal diseases as well as both medical and indirect (productivity) costs. To generate the estimates, I combined primary and secondary data sources with parameters from the literature and model assumptions. My primary sources were injury, disease, employment, and inflation data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as well as costs data from the National Council on Compensation Insurance and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. My secondary sources were the National Academy of Social Insurance, literature estimates of Attributable Fractions (AF) of diseases with occupational components, and national estimates for all health care costs. Critical model assumptions were applied to the underreporting of injuries, wage-replacement rates, and AFs. Total costs were calculated by multiplying the number of cases by the average cost per case. A sensitivity analysis tested for the effects of the most consequential assumptions. Numerous improvements over earlier studies included reliance on BLS data for government workers and ten specific cancer sites rather than only one broad cancer category. The number of fatal and nonfatal injuries in 2007 was estimated to be more than 5,600 and almost 8,559,000, respectively, at a cost of $6 billion and $186 billion. The number of fatal and nonfatal illnesses was estimated at more than 53,000 and nearly 427,000, respectively, with cost estimates of $46 billion and $12 billion. For injuries and diseases combined, medical cost estimates were $67 billion (27% of the total), and indirect costs were almost $183 billion (73%). Injuries comprised 77 percent of the total, and diseases accounted for 23 percent. The total estimated costs were approximately $250 billion, compared with the inflation-adjusted cost of $217 billion for 1992. The medical and indirect costs of occupational injuries and illnesses are sizable, at least as large as the cost of cancer. Workers' compensation covers less than 25 percent of these costs, so all members of society share the burden. The contributions of job-related injuries and illnesses to the overall cost of medical care and ill health are greater than generally assumed. © 2011 Milbank Memorial Fund.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The Press as a Watchdog for Accounting Fraud

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                14 December 2018
                December 2018
                : 15
                : 12
                : 2856
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The Institute for Occupational Health, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea; lssmail@ 123456daum.net (S.-S.L.); flyinyou@ 123456gmail.com (J.-H.Y.); newzzanggu@ 123456hanmail.net (S.W.B.); jihyunkim0924@ 123456gmail.com (J.K.)
                [2 ]Graduate School of Public Health, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea
                [3 ]Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea
                [4 ]Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan 31116, Korea; rhie76@ 123456gmail.com
                [5 ]Department of Public Health, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: juwon@ 123456yuhs.ac ; Tel.: +82-2-2228-1885
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6733-7933
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4198-2955
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2748-6835
                Article
                ijerph-15-02856
                10.3390/ijerph15122856
                6313768
                30558139
                9129fdd2-5736-4447-85fa-898192869f6d
                © 2018 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 15 November 2018
                : 12 December 2018
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                occupational injury,ilostat,freedom of the press,national indicator,under-report
                Public health
                occupational injury, ilostat, freedom of the press, national indicator, under-report

                Comments

                Comment on this article