MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081503114 · doi:10.1016/s0386-1112(14)60160-6

PUBLIC ATTITUDES, EPIDEMIOLOGY AND CONSEQUENCES OF DRINKING AND DRIVING IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

2006· article· en· W2081503114 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edi Desapriya, Ian Pike, Shelina Babul

Bibliographic record

VenueIATSS Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthPoison controlSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsSeat beltMedicinePublic healthEpidemiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Injury is the ninth most common cause of premature death worldwide and the third most common cause of years lived with disability. Many early deaths are related to motor vehicle crashes (MVC's): each year, MVC's kill 1.2 million people (3,242 deaths/day) and injure or disable 20–50 million more. The Global Burden of Disease Study, conducted in the early 1990s, predicted that traffic-related injuries will become the third largest contributor to global death and disability by the year 2020. The identification of effective strategies for the prevention of traffic related injuries is of global health importance. The substantial effect of alcohol on road safety has long been recognized, and a variety of important initiatives to combat this problem have been introduced with some measurable success. Canadians have rated drinking and driving as one of the most important social issues facing them today, placing it ahead of other prominent issues, including health care, pollution, and the state of the economy. Two factors that have contributed strongly to motor vehicle injuries and fatalities in British Columbia (BC) and Canada are alcohol-impaired driving and failure to use seat belts. Drivers who operated motor vehicles after drinking were less likely to wear seat belts, and so they continue to be a major traffic safety concern. When compared to restrained occupants, unrestrained occupants were almost 5 times more likely to die (Odds Ratios (OR) 4.70), or be injured (OR 4.66). Fractures (OR 10.70, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 7.35–15.5), lacerations (OR 7.50, CI 5.55-10.15) bleeding (OR 7.14, CI 4.97–10.26) and concussions (OR 5.49, CI 2.71-11.12), were the more common types of injuries experienced by unrestrained occupants compared to the restrained occupants. Laws mandate the use of safety belts by motor vehicle occupants, and driving under the influence of alcohol is a generic term for a series of offences under the Canadian Criminal Code. Violation of Road Traffic Laws continues to be a serious ‘social problem’ and can often have fatal consequences as demonstrated in this study.

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 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 score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIATSS ResearchSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207