Unit-Dose Packaging of Iron Supplements and Reduction of Iron Poisoning in Young Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Iron poisoning is a major cause of unintentional poisoning death in young children. The US Food and Drug Administration proclaimed a regulation for unit-dose packaging of iron supplements in 1997. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the requirement for unit-dose packaging of iron supplements decreases the incidence of iron ingestion and the incidence of deaths due to iron poisoning in children younger than 6 years. METHODS: This is a preintervention-postintervention study of the US federally mandated requirement for unit-dose packaging of iron supplements. The 10 years prior to the intervention were compared with the 5 years after its promulgation. The incidences of iron ingestion and of iron poisoning deaths for children younger than 6 years were obtained from the annual reports of the American Association of Poison Control Centers (Washington, DC). RESULTS: The average number of iron ingestion calls per 1000 of all calls to poison control centers regarding children younger than 6 years decreased from 2.99 per 1000 to 1.91 per 1000 (odds ratio, 1.29 [95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.32]; P<.001). The number of deaths decreased from 29 to 1 (odds ratio, 13.56 [95% confidence interval, 1.85-99.52]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: These are the first data that show a decrease in the incidence of nonintentional ingestion of a specific drug by young children and a decrease in mortality from poisoning by this drug after the introduction of unit-dose packaging. There was a decrease in the incidence of iron ingestion and a dramatic decrease in the number of deaths due to iron poisoning. This validates unit-dose packaging as an effective strategy for the prevention of iron poisoning and iron poisoning deaths in young children. This highly effective intervention should be considered for other medications with a high hazard for morbidity and mortality when taken as an overdose.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".