Neighbourhood Correlates of Child Injury: A Case Sudy of Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study identifies the extent to which neighbourhood socioeconomic trends are related to intentional and unintentional child injuries in Toronto, Ontario. Children living in lower socioeconomic status (SES) neighbourhoods have often been found to face a higher injury death and morbidity rate than more well‐off children. A likely explanation is an increase in the unequal exposure to injury-promoting environments on the basis of the income polarization (a declining middle income group). However, the strength of the inverse relationship between SES and injury is related to a number of factors, including the SES indicator chosen by the researcher. Hence, a goal of the study is to determine whether neighbourhood socioeconomic trends toward income polarization have predictive power in explaining variation in injury rates in young children aged 0-6, over and above more typical measures of SES and neighbourhood disadvantage. \n\nCensus data were used to determine socioeconomic trends. Neighbourhoods (census tracts) were divided into three distinct categories based on neighbourhood change in average individual income: neighbourhoods that have been improving, declining, and those displaying mixed trends. This analysis of neighbourhoods was merged with geo-coded hospital-based emergency department data to calculate rates of overall injuries, falls, burns and poisoning. The predictive power of neighbourhood socioeconomic trends on injury was compared to more typical neighbourhood disadvantage measures such as income (high, medium, low), neighbourhood employment rates, education levels, and housing quality from the 2006 census.\n\nSocioeconomic trends contributed significantly to injury outcomes, but the contribution of other neighbourhood disadvantage indicators was higher. Housing in need of repair and individuals with no university degree in a neighbourhood were positively correlated with three of four outcomes. A high immigrant population in a neighbourhood was negatively correlated with three of four outcomes. Neighbourhood socioeconomic trends had slightly more predictive power than the more typical measure of SES (high, medium or low income). Researchers should carefully consider their socioeconomic status measures when predicting injury outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".