Booster seat laws and child fatalities: a case–control study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A case-control study examined, primarily, the association between booster seat laws and fatalities among children in frontal collisions and, secondarily, the association between booster seat laws and reported restraint use, and restraint use and child fatalities. Children who died in a crash in the US were cases, and children who survived a fatal crash were controls. Subjects were child passengers (4-8 years old) in the Fatality Analysis Reporting System Database, 1995-2005. In states with a booster seat law, children were less likely to die than in states without a law (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98). They were also more likely to be restrained (adjusted OR 1.59; 95% CI 1.21 to 2.09) and were more likely to be correctly restrained (adjusted OR 4.44; 95% CI 3.18 to 6.20). It is concluded that booster seat laws are associated with a decrease in child deaths and an increase in correct restraint use among children involved in a fatal crash in the USA.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it