MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171497657 · doi:10.1097/bcr.0b013e3182789057

Incidence of Hot Tap Water Scalds After the Introduction of Regulations in Ontario

2013· article· en· W2171497657 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elsa Clouatre, Ruxandra Pinto, Joanne Banfield, Marc G. Jeschke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineLibrary scienceFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hot water scalds can be quite debilitating for a prolonged period of time. It has been previously determined that the severity of hot water scalds increases in a logarithmic trend with water temperature, which has led to legislations requiring changes to the physical environment to reduce the temperature of hot water. In September 2004, Ontario changed its Building Code, requiring all new or renovated residential buildings to lower the maximum setting of their hot water heaters to 49°C (120°F). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the legislation at reducing both the overall incidence and hospitalizations caused by hot tap water scalds. Hot tap water scald cases were identified from the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System and Discharge Abstract Database databases provided by Canadian Institute for Health Information for April 2002 to March 2010. Annual incidences, hospitalizations, and outcomes were recorded. There were a total of 6952 hot tap water scald cases in Ontario, including 408 hospitalizations in the 8-year period. The average annual incidence rate for hot tap water scalds for the study period was 6.93 cases per 100,000 population and the average hospitalization rate was 0.4 cases per 100,000 population. The high-risk population group of children and elderly comprised the majority of hospitalization cases (60%); however, adults are responsible for the majority of the ambulatory cases (67%). There was a significant decrease in the age-standardized monthly ambulatory scald cases per 100,000 population after the intervention of 0.01055 (95% confidence interval [CI] [0.004, 0.017]; P = .0018) with a rate of change of 0.9455 (95% CI [0.90, 0.98]; P < .0001) and a long-term decrease of 0.19 per 100,000. There was no significant difference in length of stay of hospitalized cases after the intervention (rate ratio = 0.91; 95% CI (0.70, 1.18); P = .4624). Overall, the regulation of limiting the maximum hot water temperature in residential homes has had a positive impact on reducing the overall number of hot tap water scalds; however, they still cause a considerable amount of morbidity because the number of hospitalized cases did not change significantly. In addition to implementing regulations, active prevention and educational campaigns are still necessary to eliminate this preventable injury.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207