MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000441602 · doi:10.1097/ta.0b013e31820783a3

Effectiveness of the P.A.R.T.Y. (Prevent Alcohol and Risk-Related Trauma in Youth) Program in Preventing Traumatic Injuries: A 10-Year Analysis

2011· article· en· W2000441602 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne Banfield, M. J. Lázaro Gómez, Alex Kiss, Donald A. Redelmeier, Frederick D. Brenneman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Logistic regressionHomicideInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthPoison controlDemographyEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The P.A.R.T.Y. (Prevent Alcohol and Risk-Related Trauma in Youth) program is a 1-day injury awareness and prevention program for youth aged 15 years and older. The goal is to teach adolescents to recognize their injury risks and make informed decisions to reduce them. This study assessed the effectiveness of the P.A.R.T.Y. Program in preventing traumatic injuries during a period of 10 years (1992-2004). METHODS: P.A.R.T.Y. participants (STUDY) were matched with subjects having the same age, gender, residential area, and initial year in database, who did not attend the P.A.R.T.Y. Program (CONTROL). Data from hospital discharge database, and provincial health claims, were searched to determine the incidence of traumatic injuries in both groups. Statistical comparisons were made for the two groups, gender, calendar year, and before and after the graduating driver licensing system was implemented, using the χ and conditional logistic regression analysis with a p<0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: Of 3,905 P.A.R.T.Y. participants, 1,281 were successfully randomly matched on the above 4 variables with 1,281 controls. The most frequent injury was injury by other or homicide 373 of 2,562 (14.8%). There were fewer traumatic injuries in the STUDY group than in the CONTROL group (43.3% vs. 47.4%; p=0.02; OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.45). This difference was stronger in females (44.4% vs. 49.0%; p=0.04) and before the graduating driver licensing system implementation (60.1% vs. 67.2%; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The P.A.R.T.Y. Program effectively reduced the incidence of traumatic injuries among its participants. This effectiveness was stronger among females and before the driver licensing system was implemented.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations39
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207