Choking prevention: shortcomings of traditional public education campaigns, prompting the development of web-based interactive teaching tools for preteens, teenagers, and adults.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the BC Children's Hospital (BCCH) Safe Start Choking Prevention campaign, which began in 2002 and used newspaper, magazine, radio, and television interviews of parents, injury prevention experts, and physicians to educate the public about choking risks, prevention, and treatment (CRPT); to compare our campaign with other campaigns; and to determine if a new strategy is needed to educate the public about CRPT. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the number of cases of laryngeal, bronchial, and esophageal foreign bodies (LBEFBs) that required rigid endoscopy under general anesthesia at BCCH and/or admission to BCCH was conducted. Data from January 1997 to December 2002 to January 2003 to December 2006 were compared. The world literature on choking prevention and analysis of barriers to CRPT public education was reviewed. RESULTS: The data demonstrate the ineffectiveness of our traditional media campaign. The number of total operating room visits at BCCH for LBEFBs increased marginally after our choking prevention campaign began. Published reports from Israel and Crete indicate that educational campaigns that included direct teaching of CRPT by otolaryngologists and other health educators to parents and their children are effective; however, such campaigns would be difficult to replicate within larger populations. CONCLUSION: A new strategy for CPRT public education is required. We are creating an animated video and a comprehensive, interactive website to teach CRPT to preteens, teenagers, and adults (with prospective validation of knowledge transfer and long-term outcome measurement).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".