MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011010323 · doi:10.1080/15389580902995166

Back-over Collisions in Child Pedestrians from the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program

2009· article· en· W2011010323 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cindy Nhan, Linda Rothman, Morgan Slater, Andrew Howard

Bibliographic record

VenueTraffic Injury Prevention · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationToronto Western HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAUTO21 Network of Centres of ExcellenceNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
KeywordsInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthPoison controlSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsMedical emergencyInjury surveillanceForensic engineeringMedicineEngineeringTransport engineeringPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the current study was to describe the burden of back-over collisions within the context of other child pedestrian collisions as identified through a pediatric emergency room injury surveillance database. METHODS: Injury data for child pedestrian motor vehicle collisions from 1994 to 2003 were obtained from the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP). Back-over collisions involving children under the age of 14 were identified and classified by written narratives. Characteristics of children involved in back-over collisions were described, and for those admitted to hospital, the nature of injury was compared with other types of child pedestrian collisions. RESULTS: There were 4295 child pedestrian motor vehicle collisions reported to CHIRPP during the study time period. Of the 4295 children, 148 (3.4%) were injured in a back-over collision, with 49 (33.1%) of these collisions involving a vehicle backing out of a driveway. Children involved in back-over collisions were significantly younger than those in forward-moving/other collisions; however, almost 50 percent of back-over collisions involved children older than age 4. Children involved in back-over collisions on driveways were significantly younger than those involved in collisions occurring at other locations. Of those admitted to hospital, children in back-over collisions were more likely to sustain injuries to internal organs. Children in back-over collisions were less likely to sustain severe/mild head injuries and hip/leg fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Although back-over collisions represent a small proportion of pedestrian motor vehicle collisions, they tend to involve more severe injuries, as indicated by their admission to hospital. It was found that older children are also at risk of back-over collisions and back-over collisions occur in areas other than driveways. In order to lessen the burden of back-over collisions, interventions must address children of different ages and a variety of locations.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraffic Injury PreventionSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207