Stages of development and injury: An epidemiological survey of young children presenting to an emergency department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to use a local (Glasgow, west of Scotland) version of a Canadian injury surveillance programme (CHIRPP) to investigate the relationship between the developmental stage of young (pre-school) children, using age as a proxy, and the occurrence (incidence, nature, mechanism and location) of injuries presenting to a Scottish hospital emergency department, in an attempt to replicate the findings of a recent study in Kingston, Canada. METHODS: We used the Glasgow CHIRPP data to perform two types of analyses. First, we calculated injury rates for that part of the hospital catchment area for which reasonably accurate population denominators were available. Second, we examined detailed injury patterns, in terms of the circumstances, mechanisms, location and types of injury. We compared our findings with those of the Kingston researchers. RESULTS: A total of 17,793 injury records for children aged up to 7 years were identified over the period 1997-99. For 1997-2001, 6,188 were used to calculate rates in the west of the city only. Average annual age specific rates per 1000 children were highest in both males and females aged 12-35 months. Apart from the higher rates in Glasgow, the pattern of injuries, in terms of breakdown factors, mechanism, location, context, and nature of injury, were similar in Glasgow and Kingston. CONCLUSION: We replicated in Glasgow, UK, the findings of a Canadian study demonstrating a correlation between the pattern of childhood injuries and developmental stage. Future research should take account of the need to enhance statistical power and explore the interaction between age and potential confounding variables such as socio-economic deprivation. Our findings highlight the importance of designing injury prevention interventions that are appropriate for specific stages of development in children.
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 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 | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".