MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123694995 · doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsm029

Addressing the Issue of Falls off Playground Equipment: An Empirically-Based Intervention to Reduce Fall-Risk Behaviors on Playgrounds

2007· article· en· W2123694995 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara A. Morrongiello, Shawn Matheis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAdventure Sports and Sensation Seeking
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Center for Injury Prevention and ControlU.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Sensation seekingVulnerability (computing)Injury preventionPoison controlSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychologyOccupational safety and healthArousalDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologySocial psychologyMedicineComputer securityMedical emergencyPersonalityPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The present study evaluated the impact of an intervention to reduce fall-risk behaviors on playgrounds among children 6-11 years of age. METHODS: Children completed posters indicating risky playground behaviors they would and would not do. In the intervention group, video and audio presentations were used to expose children to injury occurrences so that injury vulnerability was communicated in a fear-evoking way. In the control group, children only completed the pre- and post-intervention measures. RESULTS: Significant decreases in intentions to risk-take were obtained in the intervention, but not the control group. Effectiveness did not vary with children's age or sex, but was greater for those scoring high in sensation-seeking. CONCLUSIONS: A fear-appeals approach proved successful to reduce intended fall-risk behaviors, particularly for children high in sensation-seeking whose risk-taking is motivated by affect arousal.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 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

Citations48
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric PsychologySame topicAdventure Sports and Sensation SeekingFrench-language works237,207