Seat Belt Use Before and After Motor Vehicle Trauma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle crashes cause significant morbidity and mortality annually. Seat belt use has partially been associated with a decreased risk of morbidity and mortality among those involved in motor vehicle crashes. Persons injured in motor vehicle crashes and not wearing seat belts have an increased risk of admission to trauma centers for motor vehicle crash-related injury. The purpose of this study was to measure changes in seat belt use after discharge among patients admitted to a Level I trauma center for injuries sustained in motor vehicle crashes. METHODS: Patients admitted to a Level I trauma center for injuries sustained in motor vehicle crashes during 1998 were eligible for participation. A telephone interview was conducted with a random sample of 136 eligible patients regarding patterns of seat belt use before and after their collision. Demographic data and clinical characteristics were also collected. The frequency of seat belt use before and after crash involvement was compared for all patients and stratified by age, gender, race, and Injury Severity Score (ISS). RESULTS: Slightly over half (54%) of patients reported "always" wearing a seat belt before their collision compared with 85% afterward. Younger age groups, male subjects, and whites had the largest increases in the frequency of seat belt use after collision (45%, 37%, and 44% increases, respectively). With respect to injury severity, the largest increase in the frequency of seat belt use was among those with ISS of 15 to 25 (82% increase). Significant concordance between patient- and emergency medical service-reported use of seat belts was observed. Among subjects reported by emergency medical service personnel to have been restrained, nearly 90% reported belt use at the time of the telephone interview. The most frequently cited occasion for failure to use seat belts (30%) was when taking short trips. Other reported reasons were forgetting to fasten belts (29%), discomfort (10%), being in a rush (8%), riding in the back seat (4%), and that seat belts were unnecessary when riding with a good driver (3%). CONCLUSION: Involvement in a motor vehicle crash results in increased seat belt use. Prevention efforts should be directed toward those patients who report infrequent use. Patient "converts" to seat belt use after collisions may be useful in public awareness and prevention campaigns.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».