Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Eye burns can cause significant ocular morbidity and miss early detection if unsuspected. The objective was to ascertain the reported causes of burns to the eyes in children. METHODS: Published literature on eye burns in children was searched from 1950 to July 2008 in MEDLINE and from 1982 to July 2008 in CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) to identify all reported cases. RESULTS: Forty-two articles from MEDLINE, 5 from CINAHL database, and 6 from the reference lists were included in the analysis. Eye burns in children were caused by thermal, electrical, microwaved food and drinks, and solar hazards. Chemical agents included household cleaning agents, industrial chemicals, certain medications, agricultural chemicals, and some miscellaneous agents. Biological agents reported were millipedes, snake venom, vesicatory insects, and Manchineel tree sap. CONCLUSIONS: This article shows that children experience eye burns due to many preventable causes. Public education strategies should be implemented to prevent eye burns in children.
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 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".