Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Clothing, Not Specified ranks #63 of 838 by danger score (44/100) at ER-volume #89 of 838 (28,969/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #63
- danger rank of 838
- #89
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 44/100
- danger score
- 28,969/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 (44/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
44 Higher than most more dangerous than 90% 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: 71/100
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) | 12 | 81st | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 28,969 | 88th | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | -2% | 62nd | 15% | CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries |
| Consumer incident reports | 6 | 37th | 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 579,358 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1658. Segments sum to 579,358 - 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 Personal Care & Safety Products 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.
Personal Care & Safety Products danger scores
How this 44/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for clothing, not specified - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 28,969 ER visits/yr High volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 11.9% High admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.01% Low fatality rate
- 5-year trend-2%
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 clothing, not specified are roughly flat over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2017 (40,177 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2005 (14,382 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is other to the lower trunk, accounting for approximately 53,881 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by strain, sprain to the lower trunk (49,669 cases). The 75+ age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 112,104 cases over the NEISS window, and females appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 11.9% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer, and a small fraction (0.01%) result in fatality.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 6 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how clothing, not specified 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 | 12,953 | 13,532 | |
| 5-14 | 10,017 | 11,987 | |
| 15-24 | 15,335 | 33,699 | |
| 25-34 | 21,743 | 60,452 | |
| 35-44 | 20,944 | 60,061 | |
| 45-54 | 22,242 | 57,933 | |
| 55-64 | 20,571 | 47,941 | |
| 65-74 | 14,097 | 43,619 | |
| 75+ | 22,211 | 89,893 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Lower Trunk | Other | |
| Lower Trunk | Strain, Sprain | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| Lower Trunk | Fracture | |
| Shoulder | Strain, Sprain | |
| Ankle | Strain, Sprain | |
| Upper Trunk | Strain, Sprain | |
| Shoulder | Other | |
| Lower Trunk | Nerve Damage | |
| Lower Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| All Parts Body | Other | |
| All Parts Body | Derma/conjunct | |
| Upper Trunk | Fracture | |
| Knee | Other |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
67YOM WAS TAKING CLOTHES OUT OF HIS CLOSET WHEN HE DEVELOPED A PAIN IN HIS LEFT UPPER ARM DX: TRAPEZIUS MUSCLE STRAIN
102YOF WAS REMOVING CLOTHES FROM HER CLOSET AT THE NURSING HOME WHEN SHE LOST HER BALANCE AND FELL BACKWARDS STRIKING HEAD DX: CLOSED HEAD INJURY
19YOM TRIPPED AND FELL OVER CLOTHES AT HOME, DX HEAD INJURY
62YOM TO ER AFTER FALL WHILE DOING LAUNDRY AT HOME, PT WAS CARRYING LAUNDRY BASKET & TRIPPED ON A RUG CAUSIN HIS RIGHT ANKLE TO FOLD, PT TRIED TO GET UP SEVERAL TIMES BUT ANKLE BUCKLED, PT HAS RIGHT ANKLE PAIN , NO THINNER USE DX ACUTE PAIN RIGHT ANKLE, CLSD BIMALLEOLAR FRACTURE OF RIGHT ANKLE
85YOF WAS DOING LAUNDRY AT HOME & LOST FOOTING & FELL ON CEMENT FLOOR, PT HIT FOREHEAD ON FLOOR CAUSING HEAMATOMA TO FOREHEAD, NO LOC OR THINNERS, PT HAS LEFT HIP & BACK PAIN DX FALL, HEMATOMA TO FOREHEAD
40YOM TO ER WAS DOING LAUNDRY AT HOME & SLIPPED IN LAUNDRY ROOM & HIT HIS FACE ON CLOTHES DRYER, NO LOC, PT HAS 2 CM LACERATION ON FOREHEAD, NO THINNER USE DX FACIAL LACERATION
65YOM WITH PUTTING HIS CLOTHES AWAY IN APARTMENT AND FELL HITTING HEAD. PT HAS HEMATOMA TO HEAD DX: CONTUSION OF PERIOCULAR REGION
59YOF PT C/O OCHEST PAIN THAT BEGAN WHILE CARRYING A LOAD OF LAUNDRY UP STAIRS DX: ATYPICAL CHEST PAIN, MUSCULOSKELETAL CHEST PAIN
73YOF WAS LIFTING A LOAD OF LAUNDRY AND DEVELOPED PAIN IN CHEST DX: CHEST WALL PAIN
80YOM WAS LIFTING A LOAD OF LAUNDRY AND DEVELOPED SEVERE PAIN IN RIGHT GROIN DX GROIN PAIN
20 YOM ON THE WAY HOME WHEN HIS CAR BROKE DOWN. PULLED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND LOOKED UNDER THE CAR WITH A FLASHLIGHT WHEN THE COOLING HOSE POPPED OFF AND SPRAYED HIM WITH HOT ANTIFREEZE. HAD IMMEDIATE PAIN TO HIS HAND AND WAS SPLASHED FROM HEAD TO TOE WITH CLOTHES DRENCHED. +PAIN TO LEFT WRIST, FACE, GENITALS/GROIN DX SUPERFICIAL PARTIAL-THICKNESS BURNS TO LEFT WRIST, GROIN/PENIS, FACE
90YOF PT FROM ASSISTED LIVIGIN/ NH; WAS DOING LAUNDRY, FELL BACKWARDS & HIT HEAD ON A CORNER DX: FALL, ABRASION OF SCLAP, LAC OF SCALP, CLOSED COMPRESSION FRACTURE OF L1 VERTEBRA
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
I have been made aware of a type of bib that is used for bottle propping. Links to some examples are: http://www.inspiredbysavannah.com/2011/02/virtual-baby-shower-multi-purpose-bib.html http://www.amazon.com/Hands-Free-Bottle-Holder-Multi-Purpose/dp/B001KTWXLE As a pediatrician and mother of 3, I know that bottle propping has multiple negative consequences, such as tooth decay and the possibility of choking if too much formula is sucked from the bottle. Without a parent holding the infant, it is less likely that they can respond in a timely way.
Clothing is being received at Gymboree that is off gassing at least Formaldehyde and Benzene.
Caller stated that after she purchased the pants, she removed it from the bag and washed them. She stated that she had noticed that when she removed the tag her eyes were burning. Caller stated that she hanged the pants to finish drying in her bathroom. Only damp around zipper when hung. I dried in dryer on Powas nonafacared stated. However, she stated that in the night when the heat would come on, she noticed an overwhelming odor. She stated she re-washed the clothing. Caller stated that she started experiencing respiratory problems. She stated after putting the clothing away and opened a window opposite end of house and all windows available she noticed that she began feeling better. Caller stated that she feels that these clothing are being made with chemicals which is a health hazard and should be reported. Asthma attack up all night using prescription asthma medication inhaler multiple times. Eyes burn and are still bloodshot and one eye is crusting up and is leaking yellow pus like material from touching tag and jeans. To return to store bag absorbed the strong smell over night that the jeans were placed in (original bag) that came home with me from the store Injury is known to me. I suffered asthma attacks for 3 days and lost alot of sleep. Very upsetting. Where is quality control?
On Tuesday, March 15, 2011 at approximately 1601 hours, there was a mediacla assist call to [REDACTED]. When medics arrived, they found an elderly white female with sever burns to her upper body and face from what at all indications was cooking related incident. Our office was notified the 17th and I responded to the scene and met with the victims daughter. I conducted an investigation and collected three layers of clothing that the victim was wearing at the time of the incident. The entire scene was photgraphed and a test burn of three small swatches of material was conducted. All three swatches burned easily with an open flame ignition. I have the three clothing articles in my pocessiona nd all three have the manufacture tags intact. The victim remains in the hospital in critical condition.
I have purchased multiple dresses from Sweet Honey (smallwood company) for my daughter. Recently, there was a post from another consumer stating that he child had suffered from dermatitis from the clothes and that an article of clothing was tested which showed that it had high levels of Formaldehyde in the clothing. This post was deleted immediately from the website of the business. I have reached out to the company via online chat with customer service and they will not respond and immediately disconnect. The dresses that I have received do have a very large chemical smell upon receiving. These articles of clothing are outsourced from China and my concern is to what we are actually exposing our children to. My daughter has been wearing these clothes for approx a few months and has also had a rash (after wearing the clothing) which I had not thought could actually be related until the recent allegations of this. She has not since had any issues but given the recent allegations from the other consumer to have LARGE amounts of it in the clothes in addition to the lack of response from the company to provide information, I am reporting.
Daughter had rash/burn from wearing clothing. Lasted 4 days. All over her check, tummy, back and arms. Very itchy and sore. Swollen and splotchy.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to clothing, not specified on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Personal Care & Safety Products
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Clothing, Not Specified: cross-group products nearest on danger score (44/100), estimated annual ER visits (28,969/yr), and hospitalization share (11.9%). 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.
- Martial Arts (activity, Apparel Or Equipment) Sports Protective Equipment & Gear 28,993/yr
- Computers (equipment And Electronic Games) Home Structures & Construction Materials 28,902/yr
- Recliner Chair Home Furnishings & Fixtures 29,038/yr
- Stools, Other Or Not Specified Floors, Walls & Ceilings 28,843/yr
Similar hospitalization rate
Nearest cross-group products by % of NEISS ER visits resulting in hospital admission.
- Stepladders Home Furnishings & Fixtures 11.9%admitted
- Window Shades, Venetian Blinds Or Indoor Shutters Home Furnishings & Fixtures 12.0%admitted
- Games Or Game Parts (excl Marbles & Computer Games) Swimming, Water & Beach Equipment 12.0%admitted
- Sheets Or Pillowcases Floors, Walls & Ceilings 12.0%admitted
Related Products in Personal Care & Safety Products
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, Clothing, Not Specified ranks #63 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #89 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does clothing, not specified rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, clothing, not specified ranks #63 by PlainSafety danger score (44/100) and #89 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (28,969/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from clothing, not specified?
The most common injury is other to the lower trunk, accounting for approximately 53,881 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from clothing, not specified increasing or decreasing?
Stable over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for clothing, not specified injuries?
The 75+ age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 112,104 cases recorded over 20 years. Females are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by clothing, not specified?
Of all ER visits involving clothing, not specified, approximately 11.9% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (88.0%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with clothing, not specified?
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.