Review of Research on High-Priority Populations at Risk - Agriculture Forestry and Fishing Research at NIOSH - page 67

of the concerns about children working in family-run operations—such as youth
operating machinery and children playing at or visiting the workplace—are similar.
To establish an approach based on industry sectors and to develop sector-specific
research goals and objectives may be disadvantageous in relation to an approach
that requires the integration of social context and the interconnectedness of all AFF
activities and populations at risk.
Given that there was no clear definition of populations at risk in its review
of NIOSH's AFF activities, the committee used the NIOSH AFF classifications of
populations at risk.
LOGIC SUBMODEL
Information received from the NIOSH AFF Program (NIOSH, 2006a) related
to inputs, activities, outputs, intermediate outcomes, and end outcomes in research
on priority populations at risk is summarized in the priority populations at risk
research logic submodel (Figure 5-1).
INPUTS
Child Labor
In 1996, NIOSH was charged with reducing injuries and illnesses in child
workers. As a result, it assigned 75 percent of available funds ($5 million dollars)
to extramural research and 25 percent to intramural activities, which consisted
primarily of surveillance.
ACTIVITIES
Child Labor
The major issues in relation to child labor identified by NIOSH and stakehold-
ers were traumatic and cumulative injuries related to farming activities. Those
activities included living on, working on, and visiting a farm. Efforts were focused
on childhood injury prevention, surveillance of fatal injuries, and childhood agri-
cultural musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). In consultation with experts, NIOSH
did a thorough qualitative review of the hazardous orders (HOs) for youth working
in agriculture and made recommendations for changing 8 of the 11 HOs.
Surveys were conducted over a number of years that were focused on identi-
fied problems or populations, such as the migrant and seasonal farm workers,
selected farm operations, and racial minority farm operators. One follow-up study
was conducted when injuries occurred on a farm using a national representative