{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013100436681222707, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.548571428571429, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Using multiple coding schemes for classification and coding of agricultural injury

BACKGROUND
Agricultural safety and health researchers have used a variety of classification and coding schemes to identify and categorize injury, illness, and disease associated with agricultural hazards. This paper demonstrates how the Farm and Agricultural Injury Classification (FAIC) and Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) coding schemes can be used in tandem for all agricultural injuries.


METHODS
Specific cases from the AgInjuryNews.org database were selected to illustrate how the FAIC and OIICS codes can be applied to agricultural injury, and to illustrate limitations that still exist with each coding scheme.


RESULTS
Using the FAIC and OIICS together provided a clearer picture of an injury incident by combining more explicit occupational and non-occupational exposures with incident type details in a single table.


CONCLUSIONS
Both FAIC and OIICS coding schemes depend on sufficient information being available from injury reports. This paper concluded with suggestions for improving coding of agricultural injury.