Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Building Sets ranks #256 of 838 by danger score (38/100) at ER-volume #257 of 838 (6,840/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #256
- danger rank of 838
- #257
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 38/100
- danger score
- 6,840/yr
- estimated ER visits (avg)
Danger score combines injury volume, hospitalization, fatality, and five-year trend. ER volume is the average annual NEISS estimate alone. Rank 1 is highest on each list.
Where this category's danger score sits nationally
Danger score (38/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
38 Around the middle lower than 30% of 838 product categories
scored CPSC product categories, bucketed by value
Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more product categories. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.
Source CPSC NEISS, PlainSafety danger-score model · 2024
Composite verdict
Composite Safety Score: 61/100
One verdict blending 4 independently-sourced dimensions from two separate CPSC systems, each benchmarked against all 838 scored product categories by percentile rather than raw value, so no single huge-volume category can dominate the scale.
| Dimension | Value | National percentile | Weight applied | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) | 4 | 34th | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 6,840 | 64th | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | +9% | 76th | 15% | CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries |
| Consumer incident reports | 163 | 90th | 20% | CPSC SaferProducts.gov public incident report count |
Methodology: each dimension is ranked against the full population's p10/p25/p50/p75/p90 breakpoints and interpolated to a 0-100 percentile; the composite is the weighted average of available percentiles. See methodology for the full benchmark table.
Where 136,832 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1345. Segments sum to 136,832 - a body-map mix, not a danger score or ER-volume rank.
Two danger lenses
Same-group peer scores and this product's dial
The bars compare PlainSafety danger scores inside the Toys & Children's Recreation group (same CPSC NEISS extract). The dial is this product's score alone on the Low/Moderate/High bands. Do not read a peer bar as an ER-visit count.
Toys & Children's Recreation danger scores
How this 38/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for building sets - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 6,840 ER visits/yr Above median volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 4.1% Below median admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
- 5-year trend+9%
Band labels compare this category against the corpus of 838 scored CPSC product categories, see the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
Across the 20-year NEISS window from 2005 to 2024, injury counts for building sets are roughly flat over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2021 (10,713 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2005 (1,372 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is foreign body to the face, accounting for approximately 46,575 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by ingestion to the internal (40,345 cases). The 0-4 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 77,087 cases over the NEISS window, and males appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 4.1% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 163 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how building sets fail in real households. Every figure on this page comes from CPSC-published data: NEISS projects national estimates from a probability sample of about 100 U.S. hospital emergency departments, while SaferProducts.gov collects voluntary reports from consumers, manufacturers, and clinicians. The danger score, trend indicators, and demographic breakdowns update automatically when CPSC releases a new yearly NEISS file, which is why this page is dated 2024-12-31. For regulatory context, consult CPSC recall notices and the SaferProducts.gov public database linked below.
Annual Injury Estimates (2005–2024)
Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 51,204 | 25,883 | |
| 5-14 | 39,257 | 11,274 | |
| 15-24 | 1,078 | 1,089 | |
| 25-34 | 866 | 1,978 | |
| 35-44 | 864 | 1,330 | |
| 45-54 | 412 | 694 | |
| 55-64 | 17 | 397 | |
| 65-74 | 181 | 78 | |
| 75+ | 80 | 115 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Face | Foreign Body | |
| Internal | Ingestion | |
| Ear | Foreign Body | |
| Internal | Aspiration | |
| Face | Laceration | |
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| Mouth | Laceration | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Head | Laceration | |
| Foot | Other | |
| Foot | Strain, Sprain | |
| Face | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Ankle | Strain, Sprain | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| Lower Trunk | Foreign Body |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
4YOF WITH POSSIBLE FOREIGN BODY IN NASAL PASSAGEWAY. POSSIBLE *** IN NOSE. DX: NASAL FOREIGN BODY
7YOM C/O SWALLOWED A *** PLASTIC TOY THAT HE PUT IN HIS MOUNTH ABOUT ONE HOUR AGO. DX: SWALLOWED FOREIGN BODY
4 YOF *** IN L NARE DX; FOREIGN BODY
5 YOM SWALLOWED A *** DX; FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
8YOM WAS PLAYING WITH SMALL TOY BEAD MAGNETS AND SWALLOWED TWO OF THEM DX: FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
5 YOM SWALLOWED A *** PIECE, DX: FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
2 YOF HIT IN HEAD WITH WOODEN BLOCK AT DAYCARE DX FACIAL ABRASION
2YOM STUCK A *** PIECE UP HIS RIGHT NOSTRIL DX: FOREIGN BODY NOSE
4YOM SWOLLOWED A *** PIECE DX: FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
5YOM STUCK A *** PIECE IN RIGHT NOSTRIL DX: FOREIGN BODY NOSE
2YOM PUT A *** PIECE UP HIS RIGHT NOSTRIL DX FOREIGN BODY NOSE
2YOM PRESENTS AFTER SWALLOWING A *** PRIOR TO ARRIVAL. DX: VOMITTING IN CHILD
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
My family and I purchased the small 3-d magnatiles. One cracked, and the magnet came loose. One of my kids fortunately spotted the loose magnet. Had a baby been visiting, this couldve been disastrous.
Briefly, [REDACTED] is a developmentally appropriate 5 year old male who ingested 10 high-powered magnets on 8/29 after playing with his older brother. His mother noted that he was initially acting fine but then developed abdominal pain and vomiting 2 days later which prompted attention for care. The high powered magnets were purchased online from Amazon after the child saw a YouTube video geared to young children. [REDACTED] asked his mother for the products, his mother saw no harm in them, did not see a warning when she purchased them online, and bought them. The product came to their home a couple days later in a non-descript manila envelope without any warning labels on the packaging. Imaging (x-ray) identified 10 magnets in the small bowel that did not pass on serial imaging. For this reason, [REDACTED] underwent surgery on 9/2/19, where a small bowel to colonic fistula was identified. Only 6 of the magnets could be removed during that initial surgery. Subsequently, [REDACTED] developed fevers and evidence of infection; antibiotics were started. After the magnets failed to pass on repeated imaging, he was again brought to the OR and had an exploratory laboratory on 9/6/19. The 4 additional magnets were identified in the cecum, removed surgically, and the bowel closed. No additional injuries were identified. [REDACTED] may be discharged from the hospital as early as tomorrow (9/10/19)
On 8/31/15 (estimated) the submitter's grandson and granddaughter played with the toy for the first time. The submitter's grandson threw the pieces up in the air and they fell in her granddaughter's hair. The submitter tried to remove the pieces from her granddaughter's hair but she was not able to. On 9/1/15 (estimated) the submitter took her granddaughter to a hair salon [REDACTED]. The submitter states the hairstylist; [REDACTED] took 7 hours to remove the pieces from her granddaughter's hair. The submitter states some of her granddaughter's hair was cut. The submitter paid $158 to have the pieces removed from her granddaughter's hair. The submitter believes there were about 100 pieces in her granddaughter's hair. The submitter states the hair stylist posted a picture of her granddaughter's hair on Facebook. On 9/29/15 the submitter contacted the firm (800-622-8339) to inform them of the incident and spoke with a rep named [REDACTED]. The submitter asked for a replacement toy or a reimbursement since she had to pay to get the pieces removed from her granddaughter's hair. The submitter states [REDACTED] refused to provide any assistance. The submitter contacted the NY Consumer Affairs Office but they referred her to CPSC. The consumer believes there should be a warning on the packaging to warn consumer about keeping it away from hair.
My ten year old son accidentally swallowed two Speks rare earth magnets. He has been in the hospital under observation waiting for the magnets to pass.
Magnetic blocks very easily cracked open and magnets are missing
Toddler swallowed 28 neodymium magnets (buckyballs) from father's desk. 1st endoscopy attempt to remove magnets was unsuccessful as they were too distal in the small intestine. Serial x-rays showed that the magnets had not moved. F/U enteroscopy (special endoscopy technique) was successful in removal of magnets. Magnets were viewed as adherent on mucosa, which showed early evidence of injury.
It is my understanding that small magnetic ball toys have been banned in the US. On 9/27/23 I saw an ad on [REDACTED] for magnetic ball kits being sold by gepodge.com. Their [REDACTED] page is Gepodge-3.
I just received my order of micro mag tiles from Magna-Tiles and the tiles are missing the fasteners that hold the magnets in place, the strong magnets fell out
Showing 8 of 163 reports.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to building sets on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Toys & Children's Recreation
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Building Sets: cross-group products nearest on danger score (38/100), estimated annual ER visits (6,840/yr), and hospitalization share (4.1%). Same-group neighbours stay in Related Products above.
Similar danger score
Nearest cross-group products by PlainSafety danger score (100-point scale).
Similar ER visit volume
Nearest cross-group products by NEISS estimated annual ER visits.
- Electric Blenders Kitchen Cooking Appliances 6,908/yr
- Freezers (separate From Refrigerators) Kitchen Cooking Appliances 6,922/yr
- Draperies, Curtains, Shower Curtains(fabric Or Plastic) Home Furnishings & Fixtures 6,929/yr
- Sprayers, Not Elsewhere Classified Home Communication & Entertainment 6,730/yr
Similar hospitalization rate
Nearest cross-group products by % of NEISS ER visits resulting in hospital admission.
Related Products in Toys & Children's Recreation
Read with this product
About this data
CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports form the basis of this page. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments.
According to PlainSafety's CPSC NEISS corpus ranking, Building Sets ranks #256 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #257 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does building sets rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, building sets ranks #256 by PlainSafety danger score (38/100) and #257 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (6,840/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from building sets?
The most common injury is foreign body to the face, accounting for approximately 46,575 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from building sets increasing or decreasing?
Stable over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for building sets injuries?
The 0-4 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 77,087 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by building sets?
Of all ER visits involving building sets, approximately 4.1% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (95.9%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with building sets?
You can file a consumer incident report at SaferProducts.gov, the official CPSC reporting portal. Reports help the CPSC identify emerging hazards and trigger investigations or recalls. You can also call the CPSC hotline at 1-800-638-2772.
PlainSafety is rendered directly from U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recall and incident records, no number is typed in by an editor. Product recall timelines and hazard labels are drawn from CPSC recall records for this product. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of August 2026.