Baby Walker Injury Awareness Among Grade-12 Girls in a High-Prevalence Arab Country in the Middle East
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Baby walkers (BWs) are a consumer product frequently associated with infant injuries. With little research in the Middle East and few population studies anywhere, female students in grade 12 in the United Arab Emirates were surveyed, assessing the prevalence of use, perceived safety, and interventions. The study population included grade-12 students in a large UAE city. Multistage random sampling selected 4/8 female Arab government schools and 3 classes each from science and arts tracks for interview by self-administered questionnaire. Response was 100%, with a total of 696 students, 55% (n = 385) of whom were Emirati citizens; 90% (n = 619) of the families used/had used BWs. Among the reasons for use, 92% reported "keeping baby safe," with 11% perceiving BWs as very safe and 74% as moderately safe. Only 16% perceived that BWs could cause injuries. Despite causing many injuries, including fatalities, BWs were perceived to be safe and used by nearly all families. Effective education of professionals, patients, the public, and decision makers is needed. Governments should consider countermeasures such as prohibiting importation, sales, and advertising, together with public education and provision of stationary activity centers.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".