Parental supervision of school-age children at home: “I think he is in his room playing a video game”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Recent research reveals that care giver supervision is a critical determinant of childhood injury. In virtually all of this research, however, the focus has been limited to care givers of preschool children (<6 years). Little is known about how care givers supervise school-age children, what factors influence supervision practices, and how supervision relates to children's risk of injury. The present study addressed these gaps in knowledge. Objectives Using a prospective design this study examined school-age children's supervision and relations between supervision and injury. Methods Mothers reported on school-age children's history of injuries and recorded home supervision over a 2-month interval. The children independently completed diaries about daily events that included injuries. Relations between supervision and both parent permissiveness and children's propensity to risk take were examined. Results Children spent 24% of time alone, mostly supervised intermittently or not at all. Parent permissiveness was associated with increased time unsupervised, while children's risk taking propensity was associated with decreased time unsupervised. Extent of direct supervision served a protective function associated with fewer injuries, while extent of indirect- and non-supervision time emerged as risk factors for injury. Conclusions These findings reveal that care giver supervision influences risk of injury across a broad age range throughout childhood. Implications for children's safety are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".