MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990052923 · doi:10.1080/17457300.2014.908221

Clothing-related motorcycle injuries in Pakistan: findings from a surveillance study

2014· article· en· W1990052923 on OpenAlexaff
Uzma Khan, Junaid A. Bhatti, Muhammad Shahzad Shamim, Nukhba Zia, Junaid Razzak, Rashid Jooma

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsDouglas CollegeDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersFogarty International Center
KeywordsInjury preventionPoison controlMedicineClothingOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionInjury surveillanceMedical emergencyEnvironmental healthPathologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to assess the burden and patterns of clothing-related motorcycle injuries in Karachi, Pakistan. Data were extracted from an ongoing traffic injury surveillance system. In three years (2007-2009), out of 99155 road traffic injury cases there were 986 (0.9%) cases of clothing-related motorcycle injuries. Most cases were females (73.9%) and pillion riders (80.6%). The crashes involving clothing-related injuries were mostly single vehicle (98.5%), and largely resulted in injuries to the external body (60.3%), limbs (51.0%), head (41.5%) and face (35.9%). One-third of injuries were either moderate (26.7%) or severe (10.2%) while 10 (1.01%) deaths were reported. Female gender (11.4%), age ≥ 45 years (19.4%), pillion riding (11.3%) and crashes occurring at intersections (12.3%) were more likely to result in moderate or severe injury as compared to other users (P < 0.001). Injuries due to entanglement of loose fitting clothing in motorcycles are not uncommon in Karachi. Awareness campaigns for prevention of such injuries may involve promotion of appropriate dressing for motorcycle riding including close wrapping of clothes and encouraging installations of covers on the rear wheels and drive chains.

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)0.001
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 score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety PromotionSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207