CHILD INJURY PREVENTION AND THE UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The UNCRC has had a significant influence on legislation, policy and programmes in child health, transforming how children have been viewed and treated. The World report on child Injury prevention stressed the importance of using a child rights based approach. Aims/Objectives/Purpose To explore ways in which the UNCRC can be used more widely in the field of child injury prevention, through the use of case studies of good practice from different parts of the world. To identify opportunities for how the child injury field can be enhanced. Methods Rights can be divided into the three Ps of protection, participation, and provision. Rights of protection include the right to be protected from exploitation. Rights of participation enable children to be involved in decisions and actions that affect them. Rights of provision include the right to education, and the right to a safe environment. Results/Outcomes We shall outline the key principles of the UNCRC and illustrate them using case studies drawn from three continents. These include: child labour and child injury; involving children in injury prevention, preventing injuries in Aboriginal children and influencing the policy agenda at national level. Significance/Contribution to the field Framing the issue of child injury around a child rights approach may give it a higher profile. The strength of a rights-based approach is that human rights are legal obligations that underpin mechanisms to hold governments accountable. Use of the UNCRC would result in a more effective public health response to child injury.
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 | 0.030 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".