MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975864914 · doi:10.1080/17457300802080602

Compulsory child restraint seat law and motor vehicle child occupant deaths and injuries in Japan 1994–2005

2008· article· en· W1975864914 on OpenAlexaff
E. Desapriya, Takeo Fujiwara, Giulia Scime, Shelina Babul, Ian Pike

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjury preventionPoison controlPoisson regressionOccupational safety and healthSuicide preventionMedicineHuman factors and ergonomicsSeat beltIncidence (geometry)Case fatality rateDemographyMedical emergencyEnvironmental healthEngineeringPopulationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of child restraint seats (CRS) is to reduce the number of individuals killed or injured in motor vehicle (MV) crashes. Japanese Road Traffic Law 17-3-4 (April 2000) specifies a requirement that CRS be used for all children aged 0-5 years. The objective of this evaluation was to determine the legislative impact on fatalities in Japan for the period 1994-2005. Data were obtained from the Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis. A time-series Poisson regression model was used to analyse the change (6 years pre/post) in incidence rate ratios of fatality and injury in MV crashes among children ages 0-5 years. Despite increases in CRS use, fatalities failed to decrease significantly after enactment of the law (incidence rate ratio: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.49-1.31). In 2005, 67% of children aged 0-5 years, who were killed as MV occupants were not seated in CRS. Between 2000 and 2005, the lack of CRS led to 43% of front seat passenger deaths, 54% of rear seat deaths, 143 children died in total and 500 + children were seriously injured. It was found that the compulsory CRS law enacted in April 2000 did not result in a statistically significant reduction in child MV occupant fatalities and injuries in Japan.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety PromotionSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207