MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093467986 · doi:10.1080/17457300.2012.745578

Keeping our children safe in motor vehicles: knowledge, attitudes and practice among parents in Kuwait regarding child car safety

2012· article· en· W2093467986 on OpenAlexaff
Sudha R. Raman, Michel D. Landry, C. Andrea Ottensmeyer, Susan Jacob, Elham Hamdan, Manal Bouhaimed

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsSt. John's Rehab Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthSuicide preventionPoison controlChild safetyHuman factors and ergonomicsSeat beltPsychological interventionMedicineCar seatCross-sectional studyEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyFamily medicinePsychiatryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Child safety restraints can reduce risk of death and decrease injury severity from road traffic crashes; however, knowledge about restraints and their use in Kuwait is limited. A cross-sectional, self-administered survey about child car safety was used among a convenience sample of parents of children aged 18 years or younger at five Kuwaiti university campuses. Of 552 respondents, over 44% have seated a child in the front seat and 41.5% have seated a child in their lap while driving. Few parents are aware of and fewer report using the appropriate child restraint; e.g., 36% of parents of infants recognised an infant seat and 26% reported using one. Over 70% reported wearing seat belts either "all of the time" (33%) or "most of the time" (41%). This new information about parents' knowledge and practice regarding child car seat use in Kuwait can inform interventions to prevent child occupant injury and death.

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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety PromotionSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207