An observational study of sun and heat protection during Canada Day outdoor celebration, 2003.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attendance at summer outdoor mass gatherings may lead to heat- and sun-related illness. The purposes of this study were: (1) to estimate the proportion of people in attendance at the 2003 Canada Day celebration in the National Capital Region who used sun and heat protective items; (2) to identify factors associated with the utilization of these protective items; and (3) to provide research data to public outdoor event organizers when developing evidence-based plans for safer events. A naturalistic observational cross-sectional method was used to gather information at the 2003 Canada Day celebration in the National Capital Region on attendees' demographics, the sun and heat protective items they used and the protective resources available at the event sites. Of the 398 observed attendees, the proportion using any one of the protective items ranged from 3 percent (an open umbrella) to 51.5 percent (sunglasses). Females were more likely to use protective items more than males, and adults more likely than children. Planners of public outdoor events should consider the factors that influence the utilization of sun and heat protective behaviours and the environmental modifications that would allow participants to make safe choices.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".