Notice bibliographique
Résumé
When recently submitting a manuscript to DHM, I noticed that three of our keywords contain the word accident, namely 'accidents', 'diving accidents' and 'scuba accidents'. 'Accident' is most strictly defined in the legal sense thus: … the word is used only for events that occur without the intervention of a human being. This kind of also may be called an act of God. It is an event that no person caused or could have prevented - such as a tornado, a tidal wave, or an ice storm. In a review of cave diving fatalities, the medical examiner's cause of death in each case (n = 368) was considered and, from these and their extensive case files, case histories were traced back through the disabling injury to the triggering event. In the majority of cases there was a clear breach of established safe procedures. The number of 'accidents' where, for example, a cave unexpectedly collapsed was rare, by far the exception. Including these words in our approved list is at odds with the stable of British Medical Journal publications, (e.g., Injury Prevention) which have dissuaded use of the word 'accident' since 1993 and banned the word since 2001. Since 2004, at considerable expense, many former NHS hospital and emergency wards in the UK have steadily been renamed emergency departments. The Journal of Accident and Emergency Medicine has been renamed Emergency Medicine Journal and, as recently as last year, the New York Police Department changed the name of their Accident Investigation Squad to Collision Investigation Squad. They also no longer use the word 'accident' in their reports, following the lead of the US Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which stopped using the word in all its printed material in 1997, claiming it …promotes the concept that these events are outside of human influence or control.(p.1.) There are many such examples of this subtle yet important change that is overtaking both western medicine and, in particular, public health. Rather than 'accident' the current trend is to accurately describe the cause of an injury. To illustrate, a submission formerly entitled 'Hot water accidents in Welsh children' would now more likely be titled 'Hot water burns in Welsh children'. The difference should be obvious; hot water burns in children are largely avoidable, (as are diving injuries). Therefore, I respectfully request we remove these key words from our journal's list. Hopefully this would not inconvenience some of our European colleagues for whom English is a second language, and this should be considered. In France, for example, sickness (DCS) is known as an accident de desaturation and illness (DCI, including arterial gas embolism), is initially described in French as an de (ADD). After all signs and symptoms are identified, commonly at around 24 h, then the injury is termed a maladie de decompression (MDD). The Canadian Government department responsible for aviation, Transports Canada, also refer to DCS/DCI as MDD. The BMJ makes exceptions, e.g., if the word appears in a formal title such as Child Accident Prevention Trust. Regarding ADD however, may I respectfully suggest to my French colleagues they consider adopting blessure de decompression (BDD)? In diving research at least, the leading hypothesis is that DCS may be prevented through better understanding of the mechanisms of this protean disease. That DCS is an 'accident' is the null hypothesis. Language: en
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 | 0,016 | 0,149 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,050 | 0,038 |
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 ».