Last data update: Dec 09, 2024. (Total: 48320 publications since 2009)
Records 1-3 (of 3 Records) |
Query Trace: Haring Sweeney M[original query] |
---|
Identifying essential critical infrastructure workers during the COVID-19 pandemic using standardized industry codes.
Billock RM , Haring Sweeney M , Steege AL , Michaels R , Luckhaupt SE . Am J Ind Med 2022 65 (7) 548-555 BACKGROUND: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) produced an advisory list identifying essential critical infrastructure workers (ECIW) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) response. The CISA advisory list is the most common national definition of ECIW but has not been mapped to United States (U.S.) Census industry codes (CICs) to readily identify these worker populations in public health data sources. METHODS: We identified essential critical infrastructure industry designations corresponding to v4.0 of the CISA advisory list for all six-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes and cross-walked NAICS codes to CICs. CICs were grouped as essential, non-essential, or mixed essential/non-essential according to component NAICS industries. We also obtained national estimated population sizes for NAICS and Census industries and cross-tabulated Census industry and occupation codes to identify industry-occupation pairs. RESULTS: We produced and made publicly available spreadsheets containing essential industry designations corresponding to v4.0 of the CISA advisory list for NAICS and Census industry titles and codes and population estimates by six-digit NAICS industry, Census industry, and Census industry-occupation pair. The CISA advisory list is highly inclusive and contains most industries and U.S. workers; 71.0% of Census industries comprising 80.6% of workers and 80.7% of NAICS industries comprising 87.1% of workers were designated as essential. CONCLUSIONS: We identified workers in essential critical infrastructure industries as defined by CISA using standardized industry codes. These classifications may support public health interventions and analyses related to the COVID-19 pandemic and future public health crises. |
Required and Voluntary Occupational Use of Hazard Controls for COVID-19 Prevention in Non-Health Care Workplaces - United States, June 2020.
Billock RM , Groenewold MR , Free H , Haring Sweeney M , Luckhaupt SE . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2021 70 (7) 250-253 Certain hazard controls, including physical barriers, cloth face masks, and other personal protective equipment (PPE), are recommended to reduce coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) transmission in the workplace (1). Evaluation of occupational hazard control use for COVID-19 prevention can identify inadequately protected workers and opportunities to improve use. CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health used data from the June 2020 SummerStyles survey to characterize required and voluntary use of COVID-19-related occupational hazard controls among U.S. non-health care workers. A survey-weighted regression model was used to estimate the association between employer provision of hazard controls and voluntary use, and stratum-specific adjusted risk differences (aRDs) among workers reporting household incomes <250% and ≥250% of national poverty thresholds were estimated to assess effect modification by income. Approximately one half (45.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 41.0%-50.3%) of non-health care workers reported use of hazard controls in the workplace, 55.5% (95% CI = 48.8%-62.2%) of whom reported employer requirements to use them. After adjustment for occupational group and proximity to others at work, voluntary use was approximately double, or 22.3 absolute percentage points higher, among workers who were provided hazard controls than among those who were not. This effect was more apparent among lower-income (aRD = 31.0%) than among higher-income workers (aRD = 16.3%). Employers can help protect workers from COVID-19 by requiring and encouraging use of occupational hazard controls and providing hazard controls to employees (1). |
Burden of occupational morbidity from selected causes in the United States overall and by NORA industry sector, 2012: A conservative estimate
Groenewold M , Brown L , Smith E , Haring Sweeney M , Pana-Cryan R , Schnorr T . Am J Ind Med 2019 62 (12) 1117-1134 BACKGROUND: Timely and reliable national estimates of the occurrence of occupational injury and illness are needed to monitor the burden of occupational morbidity and mortality, establish research and intervention priorities, and evaluate the progress and effectiveness of prevention efforts. METHODS: We provide updated estimates of morbidity from occupational injuries and selected illnesses, using current general population incidence rates, the proportion of the general public with a particular workplace exposure, and the relative risk of illness from that exposure. We provide estimates for the total U.S. working population and for specific industry sectors. RESULTS: We estimate that, in 2012, between 5 712 362 and 5 961 620 total occupational cases, including 0.7 to 1.0 million incident illnesses and 5.0 million injuries, occurred in the United States. CONCLUSION: The variety of disparate data sources and methods required to compile these estimates highlight the need for more comprehensive and compatible occupational health surveillance in the United States. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:Dec 09, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure