MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cognitive and motor abilities of young children and risk of injuries in the home

2016· article· en· W2489340911 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Ehrhardt, Yingying Xu, Jane Khoury, Kimberly Yolton, Bruce P. Lanphear, Kieran J. Phelan

Bibliographic record

VenueInjury Prevention · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteSimon Fraser University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
KeywordsHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionPoison controlSuicide preventionCognitionOccupational safety and healthForensic engineeringPsychologyEngineeringMedicineMedical emergencyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Residential injury is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in US children. Rates and types of injury vary by child age but little is known about injury risk based on child cognitive and motor abilities. The objective of this study was to determine whether cognitive or motor development in young children is associated with residential injury. METHODS: We employed data from Health Outcomes and Measures of the Environment (HOME) Study. Parent report of medically attended injury was obtained at regular intervals from 0 to 42 months. Child development was assessed at 12, 24 and 36 months using Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, 2nd edition, which generates both mental developmental index (MDI) and a psychomotor developmental index (PDI). Injury risk was modelled using multivariable logistic regression as function of child's MDI or PDI. Effects of MDI and PDI on injury risk were examined separately and jointly, adjusting for important covariates. RESULTS: Children with cognitive delay (MDI <77) were at significantly higher risk of injury than children without cognitive delay (OR=3.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 10.5, p=0.012). There was no significant association of PDI with injury. There was, however, significant interaction of MDI and PDI (p=0.02); children with cognitive delay but normal motor development were at significantly higher risk of injury than children with normal cognitive and motor development (OR=9.6, 95% CI 2.6 to 35.8, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Children with cognitive delays, especially those with normal motor development, are at elevated risk for residential injuries. Injury prevention efforts should target children with developmental delays. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT00129324; post-results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInjury PreventionSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207