MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019968003 · doi:10.1542/peds.108.2.382

The Effectiveness of a Home Visit to Prevent Childhood Injury

2001· article· en· W2019968003 on OpenAlex
W. James King, Terry P. Klassen, John C. LeBlanc, Anne‐Claude Bernard‐Bonnin, Yvonne Robitaille, Ba’ Pham, Doug Coyle, Milton Tenenbein, I B Pless

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversité de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaMcGill UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialOdds ratioIntervention (counseling)Socioeconomic statusPoison controlInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthHazard ratioEmergency medicineEnvironmental healthPopulationNursingSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of a home visit program to improve home safety and decrease the frequency of injury in children. We examined the effects of the program on 1) parental injury awareness and knowledge; 2) the extent that families used home safety measures; 3) the rate of injury; and 4) the cost effectiveness of the intervention. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: A multicenter trial conducted at 5 hospitals in 4 Canadian urban centers. PARTICIPANTS: Children <8 years old, initially enrolled in an injury case-control study, were eligible to participate. Intervention. Subsequent to a home inspection conducted to determine baseline hazard rates for both groups, participants in the intervention group received a single home visit that included the provision of an information package, discount coupons, and specific instruction regarding home safety measures. MAIN RESULTS: The median age was 2 years, with males comprising ~60% of participants. The experimental groups were comparable at outset in terms of case-control status, age, gender, and socioeconomic status. Parental injury awareness and knowledge was high; 73% correctly identified injury as the leading cause of death in children, and an intervention effect was not demonstrated. The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the home inspection items indicated that significant safety modifications only occurred in the number of homes having hot water not exceeding 54 degrees C (OR: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14, 1.50) or the presence of a smoke detector (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.94, 2.22). However, the intervention group reported home safety modifications of 62% at 4 months and significantly less injury visits to the doctor compared with the nonintervention group (rate ratio: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.96). The total costs of care for injuries were significantly lower in the intervention group compared with the nonintervention group with a cost of $372 per injury prevented. CONCLUSIONS: An intervention using a single home visit to improve the extent to which families use safety measures was found to be insufficient to influence the long-term adoption of home safety measures, but was effective to decrease the overall occurrence of injuries. Future programs should target a few, well-focused, evidence-based areas including the evaluation of high-risk groups and the effect of repeated visits on outcome.

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 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)0.002
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.292 · 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