MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

822 Swimsafe – child survival swimming skills – risks management

2016· article· en· W2510594694 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Beerman, Mike Linnan, Aminur Rahman, Fazlur Rahman, Justin Scarr

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthSuicide preventionEnvironmental healthInjury preventionIntervention (counseling)Risk managementPublic healthMedicineMedical emergencyNursingBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Child drowning in LMICs has become a major new public health issue. Drowning is the leading cause of death in children 1–17 yrs in Bangladesh. The lifecycle approach addresses child drowning for each age group. The BASS program is a multi-intervention drowning prevention program in rural Bangladesh demonstrating sustainable, effective interventions that can be scaled up. Methods Community-based Participatory Research was done in a rural community under injury surveillance. The partners in the research are UBC, CIPRB, TASC and RLSSA. SwimSafe is one of a suite of interventions. Risks of the SwimSafe intervention have been carefully reviewed and mitigated. Results There is risk assessment and mitigation in the planning and implementation of SwimSafe. The risks are greater when SwimSafe is provided in village ponds. Village pond risk management is also needed to ensure that the pond is not an add source of risk. Consultation with experts within the RLSSA is ongoing. There is Community Swimming Instructor (CSI) Training and policy on water instructor to child ratios, and other risk management issues. There have been no BASS SwimSafe training significant injuries or drowning events. SwimSafe was provided for 1393 children 3–9 yrs. 73% met the SwimSafe competency. Pass rates are not acceptable until age 6. There is increased safety risk with children under 6 yrs. SwimSafe for children with disabilities is possible but the impact remains unclear. Conclusions Risk management is a very important part the SwimSafe intervention in pond structures. Training and policy for CSI’s and supervision for enforcement is needed to prevent unintended injury or mortality. The risks are greater in children under the age of 6. The ratio of CSI to learners and the careful management of the in water teaching sessions is necessary. SwimSafe training for children under 6 yrs of age, is recommended only in research settings with high risk management ability. Interventions for children with disabilities remains a challenge.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0760.011

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207