Vehicles reversing or rolling backwards: an underestimated hazard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: A retrospective analysis of injuries caused by vehicles that were reversing or rolling backwards to establish guidelines for prevention was performed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records and questionnaires completed by parents for 32 children admitted to the Department of Pediatric Surgery, Graz, within the past eight years, were analysed. RESULTS: The median age was 2.1 years (1.0-14.0 years). Fourteen of 32 of the cars were driven by family members (43.8%); three were rolling backwards without a driver (9.4%). The median injury severity score was 3 (1-27) and the most common injuries were contusions (40.6%), fractures (31.3%), and lacerations/burns (21.9%). Most incidents occurred in driveways (37.5%) or farmyards (21.9%). Altogether 70.3% of children sustained "run-over" injuries, 29.6% were hit by the rear bumper or injured by a breaking window. CONCLUSIONS: Toddlers playing in driveways or farmyards are at risk of a injury caused by reversing vehicles/vehicles rolling backwards.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".