654 Women with Intentional Flame Burns: Findings from the World Health Organisation’s Global Burn Registry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates one in three women worldwide have experienced physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner. Very little is known about the burden of burn violence against women. Emerging evidence suggests women who experience burn violence are young, sustain severe injuries and have high mortality. Individual burn centers around the world have contributed data to the publicly accessible WHO’s Global Burn Registry (GBR) since 2017, that includes information about household intentional flame burns injuries. Despite the inability to determine if harm was self-inflicted or caused by others, we have quantified the data. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency, demographic characteristics, injuries, and outcomes of women with household intentional flame burns admitted to burn centers that contributed data to the GBR. Methods We extracted all data from the GBR for women (≥ 18 years) admitted to GBR contributing burn centers with household intentional flame burn injuries. Simple statistical analysis was performed for demographics, injury characteristics, and in-hospital outcomes. Results Between 2017 and 2022, 208 women with intentional flame burn injuries were registered in the GBR, 77.9% were from LMICs, predominantly India (58.1%). Most women were aged between 20-29 years old (35.7%) or 30-39 years old (29.0%) and the majority were illiterate (77.1%). Their burn injuries were extensive, 68.3% has burns >50%TBSA, and 27.6% had burns >90%TBSA. Only 8.1% has burns < 20%TBSA. The majority of women had inhalation injury (71.9%). Most injuries involved kerosene (67.1%). Overall, 145 women died (69%) and 8.6% discharged against medical advice. Conclusions This descriptive study contributes to a growing body of international literature demonstrating the confronting nature and devastating outcomes for women who experience intentional burn injuries. Our findings are an extreme underestimation of the true number of women with burns caused from violence admitted to burn centers, as the GBR collects data about people with burn injuries from a small fraction of burn centers globally, and women do not always disclose violence. Our findings also likely have considerable selection bias, as we analysed only a subsample of GBR injury intent data that was publicly available. We have not accounted for women who sustained intentional flame burns outside the home or other types of burns. Moreover, no new cases have been entered into GBR since 2022. Applicability of Research to Practice The need to re-establish data collection, particularly in LMICs must be prioritized to close the gap in knowledge about the burden of burn injury, as well as burn violence. Funding for the Study N/A
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 | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
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 ».