Understanding Unintentional Injury-Risk in Young Children I. The Nature and Scope of Caregiver Supervision of Children at Home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the supervision that young children routinely receive when awake and at home with a parent. METHODS: Mothers were trained to complete continuous recordings about supervision of their young child (2-5 years) when at home on each of 10 randomly selected days within a 3-week period. RESULTS: Children were supervised more often than unsupervised but were completely out of view of supervisors about 20% of their awake time, and supervision was poorer when out of view of supervisors. Older children (4-5 years) were unsupervised (8% of awake time) more often than younger children (2-3 years; 1%), were more often out of view of supervisors than younger children, and received poorer supervision than younger children when out of view of supervisors. Few sex differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide insights into the nature and scope of supervision that young children routinely experience when at home. Implications of these findings for identifying patterns of supervision that elevate children's risk of injury are discussed.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".