Premium
Capture–recapture estimates of the undercount of workplace injuries and illnesses: Sensitivity analysis
Author(s) -
Boden Leslie I.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
american journal of industrial medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.7
H-Index - 104
eISSN - 1097-0274
pISSN - 0271-3586
DOI - 10.1002/ajim.22247
Subject(s) - medicine , mark and recapture , workers' compensation , compensation (psychology) , demography , occupational safety and health , population , statistics , environmental health , psychology , social psychology , mathematics , sociology , pathology
Background In recent years, capture–recapture methods have been applied to state Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII) and workers' compensation data, but uncertainties arise because of population differences between the two sources, likely source dependence, and concerns about the accuracy of case linkage. Methods We linked SOII and workers' compensation records for California and used capture–recapture methods to estimate the proportion of injuries and illnesses involving at least 4 days away from work captured by each source. We then did a sensitivity analysis. Results Assuming source independence, estimates of the proportion of injuries and illnesses involving at least 4 days away from work captured by the SOII varied from 42.4% to 49.0%, while workers' compensation estimates were between 76.9% and 77.6%. Re‐estimating SOII capture rates assuming source dependence (OR = 3) reduced capture estimates substantially. Conclusions Estimated capture rates remained low after changing several of the underlying assumptions. Positive source dependence had the greatest impact. Am. J. Ind. Med. 57:1090–1099, 2014. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.