MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089817794 · doi:10.1353/hpu.0.0226

Unintentional Childhood Injuries in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Overview of Risk and Protective Factors

2009· review· en· W2089817794 on OpenAlexaff
Mónica Ruiz‐Casares

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la Montagne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionMedicineInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthContext (archaeology)Poison controlEpidemiologyHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionDeveloping countryPopulationGeographyEconomic growthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of unintentional injuries for children in sub-Saharan Africa has reached 53.1 per 100,000, the highest for regions across all income levels. This paper reviews the relevant literature on the epidemiology of unintentional childhood injuries in the region, with an emphasis on the risk factors associated with it. Several demographic, socioeconomic, and environmental factors contributing to injuries in children have been documented for the main causes of injury. Despite the high burden, child injury prevention and control programs and policies are limited or non-existent in many countries in the region. Accurate data regarding these injuries across and within countries is incomplete. Population-based estimates and investigations into context-specific risk factors, safety attitudes, and behaviours are needed to inform the development of effective interventions.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations68
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health Care for the Poor and UnderservedSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207