Publicly available OSHA data offers unprecedented insight into workplace injury in the United States

Millions of workers in the United States (US) are injured on the job annually. However, accurately determining the true rate of occupational injuries remains a challenge due to gaps in existing surveillance systems. Most federal initiatives aimed at injury prevention rely on underreported or incomplete data, which undermines their effectiveness.

In a recent article published online on March 12, 2025, in the American Journal of Public Health, Prof. David Michaels of George Washington University and Adjunct Prof. Gregory R. Wagner of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health propose a game-changing solution: greater use of newly accessible injury data collected by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

“Although work injuries are rarely in the public’s consciousness, they often have a profound impact on injured workers, their families, and their communities,” notes Prof. Michaels. “For many injured workers and their families, a workplace injury creates a trap in which they are less able to save for the future or to make investments in skills and education that provide the opportunity for advancement, contributing to income inequality and poverty,” he observes.

The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) and the Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII)—both managed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)—are two of the leading workplace injury surveillance systems in the US. However, these systems suffer from chronic underreporting and do not allow broad public access to the raw data.

By contrast, OSHA has recently begun collecting and publishing far more granular data. While employer-reported, it’s substantially more detailed and transparent than what is available from the BLS or state workers' compensation systems.

In their article, the researchers explain the three types of injury data collected by OSHA: data on fatal injuries, data on severe injuries, and injuries recorded on OSHA logs. They also offer examples of how these distinct types of data have been previously used by researchers to study workplace injuries in various US industries.

“Recently, OSHA has begun to collect and make public additional data that may be useful in conducting studies that can contribute to injury prevention. Although OSHA’s data are primarily self-reported by employers and have some of the limitations described,” explains Prof. Michaels.

The researchers emphasize that the transparency of this data not only aids research but also improves safety by making employers more accountable. This “spotlight effect,” they argue, encourages preventive measures even without inspections. To enhance compliance, they urge OSHA to issue citations and fines for underreporting.

Michaels and Wagner emphasize that integrating OSHA's publicly available injury records with external data—like healthcare claims, employment records, and demographic info—could unlock powerful insights. Such interdisciplinary research, they believe, is vital for crafting targeted safety interventions and ultimately reducing workplace injuries and fatalities across the US.