[Firework injuries in Denmark in the period 1995/1996 to 2006/2007].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to observe the occurrence and character of firework injuries on the two days around New Year in Denmark over the last decade. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Since 1995/1996 all Accident and Emergency Departments in Denmark have registered all contacts where fireworks were the cause of injury on 31st December and 1st January. Data comprised hospital, sex, age, type of firework, diagnosis and final treatment. Follow-up and reminder by phone secured a 100% response rate. The total number of injured patients was 4,447. RESULTS: The number of firework injuries on the 31st of December and 1st of January was reduced by half over the 12-year period. Furthermore, the number of firework injuries caused by illegal fireworks in 2006/2007 was only 10% of the number in 1996/1997. Only 8% of injuries on last New Year's Eve were caused by illegal firewoks compared to almost 50% at the beginning of the period. A similar halving is seen in serious injuries. Roughly one quarter sustained injuries to the eyes, one quarter to the head/neck and 38% to hands. CONCLUSION: Firework injuries are now half of the level in 1996/1997. Injuries caused by illegal fireworks and serious injuries have shown a downward tendency throughout the period. The actual number of severe injuries from illegal fireworks is now only 10% of the level in the mid-1990s. This reduction can be attributed to preventive campaigns, greater knowledge of the risk of fireworks in general as well as legislation. Continued focus on preventive campaigns, control of fireworks for the general public and control of firework distribution to professionals is recommended.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".