MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7042926431

The promotion of safe behaviours at the community level : evaluation of a bicycle helmet-wearing campaign among 5- to 12-year-old children

2003· article· en· W7042926431 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueFigshare · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPromotion (chess)Occupational safety and healthSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionIntervention (counseling)Poison control
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Bicycle-related injuries are among the most important public health problems in childhood. In the Montérégie Region (Québec, Canada), at the beginning of the 1990s, a 4-year community-based program aimed at promoting voluntary bicycle helmet wearing among children aged 5-12 was implemented. The program's target was to increase the rate of helmet use from 1.3% before the program (1989) to 20% in 1993 and, thereby, to reduce the rate of bicycle-related head injuries leading to hospitalisation. The aim of the thesis is to assess the impact and outcome of the Montérégie program, considering children's age and sex and socio-economic status. Four studies form the thesis, each of which includes a comparison community and repeated measures in both the intervention and reference community. The first two studies focus on behavioural changes over time. Study 1 was questionnaire-based and addressed self-reported measures including e.g., children's intention to wear a helmet and to own a helmet. Study 2 was observation-based and essentially concerned with behavioural changes de facto, both in general and according to various cycling environments (i.e., sites and living areas). The results show an increasing adoption of the target behaviour over time. The program was effective in increasing children's motivation both to use and to own a bicycle helmet. After the program had been operating for four years, 56% of the children in the target community, compared to 36 % in comparison community reported owning a helmet. The program had an accelerating effect on ownership and it was the main predictor of high intention to use a bicycle helmet. Furthermore, helmet use when cycling grew steadily and substantially over time in the target community, from a rate of 1.3% before the program implementation to 32.5% after the fourth year of the program, compared to 14% in comparison community. Helmets were worn less among boys, older children, among children observed both on school roads, and in poor municipalities. The program proved to be only one-in-three times as effective among children observed in poor municipalities as is richer ones. Study 3 and 4 dealt with changes in head-injury risks over time, considering in turn age and sex of the child (study 3) and living area socio-economic status (study 4). Data on children who were hospitalised because of bicycle-related injuries for the years 1988-1996 were obtained from the Provincial Government inpatient register that offers full coverage of hospitalisations in Québec. A reduction of the rate of hospitalisation for bicycle-related head injuries over time was observed among boys and girls, younger and older children and also among children from both poor and average-rich municipalities. The program's positive impact on head-injury risk reduction was maintained. during the three-year period following the completion of the program. In spite of the lower penetration of the program among higher risk groups in terms of helmet wearing (i.e., boys, children from poor municipalities), all groups obtained a reduction of injury-risk levels. As a whole, the results reveal favourable results in terms of increased bicycle-helmet wearing and decreased head-injury morbidity. It is very likely that the program in itself is responsible for a large share of those favourable results. Among other assets, it was based on multiple strategies consistent with underlying theory of behavioural change and planning framework and it included a wide variety of activities undertaken yearly and targeted towards determinant stakeholders. Also, the process was followed up very closely. In general terms, the result support the idea that population-based educational programs have the potential to impact on bicycle-related head injury reduction for all. They can benefit children from less accessible and most at risk groups, without stigmatising them unduly or threatening their autonomy. List of scientific papers I. Farley C, Otis J, Benoit M (1997). Evaluation of a four-year bicycle helmet promotion campaign in Quebec aimed at children ages 8 to 12: impact on attitudes, norms and behaviours. Can J Public Health. 88(1):62-6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9094808 II. Farley C, Haddad S, Brown B (1996). The effects of a 4-year program promoting bicycle helmet use among children in Quebec. Am J Public Health. 86(1):46-51. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8561241 III. Farley C, Vaez M, Laflamme L (2003). Does promoting bicycle-helmet wearing reduce head injuries? [Submitted] IV. Farley C, Laflamme L, Vaez M (2003). Bicycle helmet campaigns and head injuries among children. Does poverty matter? J Epidemiol Community Health. 57(9):668-72. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12933770

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,044
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,088

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,176
Tête enseignante GPT0,371
Écart entre enseignants0,195 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2003
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFigshareMême sujetInjury Epidemiology and PreventionTravaux en français237 207