Socioeconomic Status and Injury in a Cohort of Saskatchewan Farmers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To estimate the strength of relationships between socioeconomic status and injury in a large Canadian farm population. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 4,769 people from 2,043 farms in Saskatchewan, Canada. Participants reported socioeconomic exposures in 2007 and were followed for the occurrence of injury through 2009 (27 months). The relative hazards of time to first injury according to baseline socioeconomic status were estimated via Cox proportional hazards models. FINDINGS: Risks for injury were not consistent with inverse socioeconomic gradients (adjusted HR 1.07; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.51 for high vs low economic worry; adjusted HR 1.72; 95% CI: 1.23 to 2.42 for completed university education vs less than high school). Strong increases in the relative hazard for time to first injury were identified for longer work hours on the farm. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic factors have been cited as important risk factors for injury on farms. However, our findings suggest that interventions aimed at the prevention of farm injury are better focused on operational factors that increase risk, rather than economic factors per se.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it