A population based study of drowning in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although water-related fatality rates have changed over time, the epidemiology of drowning in Canada has not recently been examined. In spite of the evidence supporting varying drowning death rates by age, information on how characteristics of drowning incidents differ by age group remains limited. The primary objective of this study was to examine the epidemiology of drowning in Canada. A secondary objective was to describe the characteristics of these drowning incidents as they vary by age group. METHODS: A retrospective descriptive analysis was conducted using data that were collected for incidents occurring in Canada between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012. The main outcome variable was a water-related fatality, in the majority of cases (94 %) the primary cause of death was drowning. Age specific frequencies, proportions and rates per 100,000 population were calculated and compared among six age groups. RESULTS: There were 2392 unintentional water-related fatalities identified in Canada between 2008 and 2012. Death rates (per 100,000) varied by age group 0-4 (1.05), 5-14 (0.57), 15-19 (1.27), 20-34 (1.70), 35-64 (1.44), 65+ (1.74). The male to female ratio was 5:1. Differences in the characteristics of drowning by age group were identified across: sex, body of water, urban versus rural location, time of year, activity type, purpose of activity, alcohol involvement, personal flotation device use, accompaniment, and whether a rescue was attempted. CONCLUSIONS: The study results suggest that there may be a need for drowning prevention strategies that are tailored to specific age groups. Rural areas in Canada may also benefit from targeted drowning prevention.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".