European Occupational Diseases Statistics (EODS) - Experimental statistics
European occupational diseases statistics (EODS)
Why do we need the European Occupational Diseases Statistics (EODS)?
European Occupational Diseases Statistics (EODS) are essential elements in the European Commission’s strategy to assess the efficiency of Community legislation on Health and Safety at Work. To improve the working conditions, knowledge of the numbers, rates, frequencies and trends of occupational diseases are fundamental. They allow the monitoring and the prioritization of preventive actions at Community level.
As of now, no such database exists at the European level. The objective of EODS pilot is to respond to this need by gathering national data in a unique database and provide trends on the most recognized occupational diseases in the European Union. These requirements are underlined in the Regulation (EC) No 1338/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008; annex V. Beyond the occurrence of diseases, these data could provide useful information regarding causality (exposure and medical consequences), which are needed for the prevention and the evaluation of the impact of the problem.
Why are the EODS experimental?
Their experimental nature is mainly related to the fact that the data on recognised cases of occupational diseases reflect not only the occurrence of such diseases, but also the way in which the concept of occupational disease has been integrated into the national social security systems. The existence of different legal systems and procedures for the recognition of occupational diseases in Europe makes the comparative exercise difficult, noting that a low number of recognised cases of an occupational disease in a given country is neither a sign of the absence of such a disease nor necessarily a clear proof of successful prevention. In the same way, well-established detection systems and large-scale information campaigns could explain the high numbers of reported and recognised cases in some countries.
The comparative exercise is nevertheless still useful to derive broad trends for the future, to observe what are the most frequent diseases in Europe, or simply to diagnose functional problems of the reporting systems in certain countries. This exercise also remains useful for occupational diseases whose recognition conditions are relatively similar in all the national systems. Based on the first wave of the EODS pilot data collection, Eurostat, with the support of the Task Force EODS, produced a short list of occupational diseases also called the ‘core-list’ of diseases. Their main characteristics are the significant number of recognized cases at European level and recognition in nearly all European countries.
How are the EODS produced?
The occupational disease statistics are based on administrative data collected at national level by various organizations and usually centralized by the statistical office. The regulation (EC) No 1338/2008 outlines the domain specific requirements (aim, scope, subjects covered, reference periods, intervals and time limits for data provision, metadata, etc.) of the data collection. Due to the comparability issues, the current dissemination has been limited and consists of one indicator called EU INDEX that shows the evolution of the diseases in the ‘core-list’ over time, at EU level. The EU INDEX will be complemented by the national country profiles, which will show the national situation in relation to the ‘core-list’ of occupational diseases. The dissemination of national country profiles is subject to national agreement.
Access the statistics
Due to comparability issues, the dissemination of European occupational diseases statistics is limited to the short list of diseases.
To access the Country Profiles tables in format, please click on the country flag below.
(*) Not available
(*) Not available
To help Eurostat improve these experimental statistics, users and researchers are kindly invited to give us their feedback:
- Would you have comments or suggestions regarding the ‘core list’ of occupational diseases and their groupings?
- Would you have comments or suggestions regarding the collected variables?
- Which other indicators could be useful and taking into account overcoming the comparability problem?