Injury Analyses in Rural Children: Comparison of Old-Order Anabaptists and Non-Anabaptists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Southwestern Ontario largely comprises rural farming districts and is home to numerous Old-Order Anabaptist settlements. Our objective was to describe the injuries sustained by rural children, both Old-Order Anabaptist and non-Anabaptist, to better target injury prevention programs. METHODS: We retrospectively examined injury data of rural children in Southwestern Ontario with injury severity scores ≥ 12 obtained from hospital and trauma databases (1997-2007). RESULTS: A total of 422 rural children were included in this study: 7.8% Anabaptist (n = 33) and 92.2% non-Anabaptist (n = 389). The age of injured Anabaptist children (median, 7 years; interquartile range = 10) was younger than non-Anabaptist children (median, 14 years; interquartile range = 7; p < 0.001). Anabaptist children were most frequently injured on their property (48.5%; n = 16 of 33; p < 0.001). Non-Anabaptist children were mostly injured on roads (56.8%; n = 221 of 389; p < 0.05) and by motor vehicle collisions (MVCs; 40.1%; n = 156 of 389; p = 0.02). Frequent causes of injury among Anabaptist children were falls (24.2%; n = 8 of 33; p = 0.02), animals (15.2%; n = 5 of 33; p = 0.004), and buggies (9.1%; n = 3 of 33). Approximately half of both groups injured in MVCs did not use seat belts. There were no significant differences between cohorts in sex, injury severity scores, hospitalization days, rates of complications, interventions, comorbidities, or mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Injuries to Anabaptist children occur at a young age, primarily on their property, and exhibit a unique spectrum of mechanisms. In contrast, injuries to non-Anabaptist children occur at an older age, primarily on roads, and in MVCs. The use of protective devices was low among all rural children. Development of collaborative injury prevention programs targeted to distinct rural communities, including Anabaptist and non-Anabaptist, are needed for reducing injuries among rural children.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".