MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Learn Not to Burn: A TV Public Service Announcement and Childrenʼs Book for Burn Prevention in Cambodia

2006· article· en· W2045824537 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amy Mizen, Mei Ling Hsiao, Martín Gómez, James Gollogly, M. Beveridge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCambodian History and Society
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePublic healthLibrary scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cambodia is a developing country of 13 million people where there are an estimated 20,000 burn injuries and 2000 burn deaths annually. Two thirds of the burns occur to children under the age of ten. Since 2000, members of a Canadian regional burn centre have been training Khmer surgeons, nurses and therapists at an NGO hospital in Phnom Penh that provides free treatment for disabled people. Burn prevention clearly is a priority and after initial success with a small burn education project in schools of one Cambodian province we were asked to extend the program and offered funding from the Australian and British Embassies. A burn prevention video to be broadcasted on TV was chosen as the most effective medium because Cambodian children watch an average of two hours of television daily (data from school survey). Well recognized burn messages such as “cool the burn with water” and “stop, drop and roll” were selected. Common local burn scenarios were identified by examining hospital records. They included open flame burns, cooking burns, mosquito-net burns and petrol burns. A series of scripts were created and translated into Khmer language appropriate for children age 8–12. Local TV production companies tendered for the contract and the videos were produced entirely using local resources and talent. The total cost of production was US$14,000. The Cambodian Royal Family provided a Royal Blessing for the project and gave a cash donation of US$2000 to cover the cost of broadcasting the messages for the first month.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.003

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicCambodian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207