MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

909 Protecting kids around liquid laundry packets: a national effort to educate communites

2016· article· en· W2514415839 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kate Carr, Torine Creppy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaundryEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyOccupational safety and healthPoison controlMedicineEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Exposure to liquid laundry detergent packets is an emerging risk for young children in the United States. In 2014, poison control centres in the U.S. received 11,711 calls about children 5 and younger having been exposed to laundry detergent packets. This is an 11% increase in calls from 2013, and an 85% increase from 2012. In a study of calls to U.S. poison control centres from 2012 and 2013, more than 700 children under six years were hospitalised and experienced serious effects as a result of exposure to laundry detergent packets. The number of exposures was greatest among 1- and 2-year-olds. According to the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), children can experience loss of consciousness, difficulty breathing, excessive vomiting, severe eye burns, and temporary vision loss. Methods Safe Kids conducted a review of existing data and recommendations from the CPSC and the American Association of Poison Control Centres to inform the development of a national awareness campaign and educational materials for caregivers of young children. Results The campaign garnered a total of 489 million impressions from traditional media and digital activation. We provide 400 Safe Kids’ coalitions and more than 100 national public health and safety partners with access to bilingual educational materials and digital activation tools. We incorporated key safety messages into 180 local events reaching 125,000 people. Conclusions The statistics are alarming, and there are global concerns as well. Changes to product design and packaging, including the addition of warning labels, are underway in many countries. Educational and awareness efforts in several countries are raising mindfulness among caregivers of this emerging risk to younger children. Safe Kids is exploring opportunities to extend education and outreach efforts in the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Canada, Japan, Israel, Austria, France and Poland.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention→French-language works237,207→