MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156796672 · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdn103

Fatal and non-fatal fire injuries in England 1995-2004: time trends and inequalities by age, sex and area deprivation

2008· article· en· W2156796672 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyPoisson distributionPoison controlPoisson regressionGeographyIncidence (geometry)Injury preventionEnvironmental healthMedicineStatisticsMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To examine time trends and deprivation gradients in fire-related deaths and injuries. METHODS: A cross-sectional study and time trend analysis using data on fire casualties in England between 1995 and 2004 obtained from the Department for Communities and Local Government. Injury rates were calculated assuming a Poisson distribution. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated to compare changes in deprivation gradients over time. RESULTS: There were significant reductions in fatal and non-fatal fire injuries in children (fatal injuries IRR chi(2)(1) = 11.18, P < 0.001; non-fatal injuries IRR chi(2)(2) = 61.44, P < 0.001), adults (fatal injuries IRR chi(2)(1) = 15.99, P < 0.001; non-fatal injuries IRR chi(2)(2) = 183.25, P < 0.001) and older people (fatal injuries IRR chi(2)(1) = 56.88, P < 0.001; non-fatal injuries IRR chi(2)(2) = 54.09, P < 0.001) between 1995 and 2004. Adult and child fire deaths were most commonly caused by smokers' materials (e.g. cigarettes, cigars and tobacco), and cigarette lighters and matches, respectively. Cooking appliances caused most non-fatal fire injuries. Injury rates increased with increasing levels of deprivation and deprivation gradients did not change over 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Fire prevention interventions should promote the safe use of cooking and heating appliances and the responsible use of smokers' materials, lighters and matches, and should target those at greater risk of fire, including the socially disadvantaged.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.288 · 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