Baby walker injury, disability, and death in a high-income middle eastern country, as reported by siblings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Baby walkers (BWs) are frequent causes of infant injuries. Little research is reported from the Middle East and few population-based studies anywhere. METHODS: Using multistage random sampling in a city of the United Arab Emirates, 4 of 8 female Arab government high schools and 3 final-year classes each from science and arts tracks were selected. Structured self-administered questionnaires assessed prevalence, frequency, severity, and external causes of BW incidents and injuries, and residential hazards. RESULTS: Response was 100 %, 696 students, 55 % (n = 385) Emirati citizens. 87 % (n = 605) of families used/had used BWs. Among 646 injuries were 118 ER (emergency) visits, 42 hospitalizations, 11 disabilities, and 3 deaths. Average risk was 1 incident/user, 1 injury/4 users, 1 ER visit/20, 1 hospitalization/55, 1 disability/200, 1 death/1000. Odds ratios for >1:1 floor levels were 2.3 (95 % confidence interval: 1.2, 4.3) for hospitalization, 16.8 (95 % CI: 2.1, 132.5) disability. Incidents included hitting objects 48 % (n = 1322), overturning 23 % (n = 632), accessing hazardous objects 17 % (n = 473), and falling down stairs 11 % (n = 300); 1 % (n = 32) fell into swimming pools. In 49 % (n = 297/605) of user families, ≥1 child had been injured. CONCLUSIONS: Despite causing many injuries including disabilities and fatalities, BWs were used by nearly all families. Governments should consider Canada's lead in prohibiting importation, sales, and advertising of BWs.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".