Developing guidelines for interventions to reduce risk of low-speed vehicle run-overs of young children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Australia, research suggests that up one quarter of child pedestrian hospitalisations result from driveway run-over incidents, with the parent or family member of the child being most likely the driver of the vehicle at the time of the incident. As such, driveway run-over incidents are an important issue that need to be addressed through public health educative initiatives. A series of qualitative interviews were conducted in order to assess general behavioural and environmental changes that parents/carers had specifically undertaken in order to reduce the risk of injury to any child in their care. A second phase of the interviews was also conducted and focused on parent/carers perceptions and attitudes of the risk of a child in their care being involved in a driveway run-over incident. The interviews elicited three main themes which together built a robust model representing the main aspects parents take into consideration in making a judgement concerning the safety of their child. The first aspect concerned the safety of the domestic environment. The second aspect concerned the level of supervision a child received, whereas the third included the child's ability to understand and comply with rules, as well as maturity of risk perception and skills. The model developed from this research has direct applicability for the development and promotion of an effective intervention in order to reduce the risk of a driveway run-over incident occurring.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".