IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/199181111408-1414_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Injuries in working populations: black-white differences

Author

Listed:
  • Wagener, D.K.
  • Winn, D.W.

Abstract

BACKGROUND. Although "accidents and adverse effects" mortality is higher among Blacks than Whites, annual injury rates reported in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) are lower among Blacks. We evaluated the influence of sociodemographic risk factors on injury rates among working adults. METHODS. NHIS data from 1983 through 1987 for currently working adults were used. Methods were developed to estimate standard errors using data from different sample frames and sample sizes. RESULTS. Working Blacks had fewer reported injuries requiring medical attention or restriction of usual activities than working Whites (22.0 vs 27.0 per 100 persons per year). The difference was pronounced among younger adults in both sexes and among both poor and nonpoor. However, age, sex, and income could not completely explain racial differentials. "At-work" injury rates (36% of all injury episodes) were similar for Blacks and Whites (9.2 vs 9.9 per 100 persons per year), except low-income Blacks and Blacks in service or blue-collar occupations had nonsignificantly smaller at-work injury rates. CONCLUSION. Possible reporting biases could not be completely eliminated. However, available evidence does not rule out a true difference in injury rates by race, highlighting the complexity of understanding the etiology of injuries and, hence, developing public health programs to prevent injuries.

Suggested Citation

  • Wagener, D.K. & Winn, D.W., 1991. "Injuries in working populations: black-white differences," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 81(11), pages 1408-1414.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1991:81:11:1408-1414_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1991:81:11:1408-1414_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.