Home injury patterns in children: A comparison by hospital sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many intervention studies typically require data from several centres to ensure adequate power. The usual intention is to pool data after testing for heterogeneity. Sites that differ in sample characteristics may, on the one hand, complicate the assessment of the intervention, but on the other hand, they may add important insights through analysis of site-specific findings. OBJECTIVES: The aims of the present paper were to compare the distribution of injuries and risk factors among children participating in a five-centre study of a home-based injury prevention program, and to contrast parental injury awareness and knowledge with home safety measures. METHODS: Five children's hospitals in Canada agreed to participate in a case-control study combined with a randomized controlled trial. Patients were children zero to seven years of age presenting to a hospital emergency department with a fall, burn, ingestion or choking. Two controls were matched to each case, one with another injury and another with a minor illness. A home visitor completed a home hazard assessment based on observed safety measures. To determine whether data could be pooled, comparisons across sites were made with respect to types of injuries seen, sociodemographic characteristics, observed hazards and the parents' reported beliefs about severity of injuries, safety measures, preventability of injuries and susceptibility to injuries. RESULTS: There were few differences between the five hospitals. The mean age was 2.2 years (range 1.4 to 3.3). There were 219 falls (56%), 80 burns (20.4%), 54 poisonings (13.8%), and 38 chokings (9.7%), all distributed in a proportionately similar manner, except for poisoning, at each site. There were significantly more well-educated fathers at one hospital and younger parents with less education at another. Homes were generally lacking five recommended safety measures. However, most parents at all sites perceived their home as being very safe for any of the specific injuries, and their child as being at low risk of sustaining any of these injuries. CONCLUSIONS: The similarity across sites supports the pooling of these data regarding hospital-treated injuries in young children in urban Canada. Most parents at all sites perceived their home as being very safe in spite of their homes lacking one-quarter of the recommended safety measures. This discrepancy between parental perception and home safety highlights the needs for further education and prevention efforts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".