Health promotion initiative for booster seats: A school-based educational intervention.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a booster seat educational intervention on the purchasing/obtainment behavior of parents. A quasi-experimental methodology was utilized, including an educational seminar for parents and their children. Data analysis combined a mixed factorial ANOVA, with one between subjects factor (group; intervention vs. control) and one within subjects factor (session; pretest vs. post-test). Pre-test and post-test scores were examined related to the dependent variables of use and obtainment. Analysis of differences in retention of information and child's cooperation using the booster seat were also examined as independent variables. Findings support the development of educational programs focused on parents and children. The information compiled during this study can be used to guide future development of educational programs by advanced practice nurses in the community, as well as in the family practice setting. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2003 .M324. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 42-02, page: 0568. Thesis (M.Sc.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2003.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".