A randomized trial to assess the effectiveness of an infant home safety programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to test an intervention aimed at addressing the risk of injury in infants 2 - 12 months of age. A non-blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted, whereby parents were randomly assigned to either a control or one of two intervention groups. Parents completed questionnaires regarding safety behaviours and injuries at the 2 (baseline), 6 and 12 month immunization visit at the community health unit. During the 2 month visit to the health unit, the two intervention groups received a home safety kit containing nine items, an instructional brochure and a risk assessment checklist. Subjects randomized to the safety kit plus home visit group also received a standardized home visit from a community health nurse. Two of the 14 parental safety behaviours showed a significant increase in use among parents in the intervention groups. Neither of the interventions was associated with a reduction in parent-reported injuries among children. It was concluded that home visitation may provide a beneficial adjunct to the provision of safety devices and may increase use by parents.
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 | 0.027 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".