↓ Skip to main content

Occupational Injury Surveillance Among Law Enforcement Officers Using Workers’ Compensation Data, Illinois 1980 to 2008

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Occupational Injury Surveillance Among Law Enforcement Officers Using Workers’ Compensation Data, Illinois 1980 to 2008
Published in
Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, June 2016
DOI 10.1097/jom.0000000000000708
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Injuries among law enforcement officers are common, but poorly understood; workers' compensation (WC) data are an underutilized tool for occupational surveillance. A stratified analysis of WC claims among four categories of law enforcement officers used descriptive techniques, linear and robust regression. Eighteen thousand eight hundred ninety-two officers filed claims from 1980 to 2008. Correctional officers had the highest rates, with leading causes of falls and assaults; motor vehicle crashes were the most common cause of injury among state police. Total monetary compensation was lower for correctional officers, but was explained by lower time lost and lower average weekly wage. The rate and types of injuries varied by subgroups, with correctional officers having the majority of injuries, but lower severity. WC data elucidate causes and outcomes of occupational injuries, which can guide prevention.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Master 4 16%
Professor 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 8 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 3 12%
Social Sciences 3 12%
Environmental Science 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Sports and Recreations 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 9 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2021.
All research outputs
#11,256,159
of 34,447,360 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
#2,371
of 6,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,756
of 343,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
#27
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,447,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.