MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2763960088 · doi:10.1093/pch/20.5.e77a

120: Injuries Associated with Liquid Detergent Packets

2015· article· en· W2763960088 on OpenAlexaffabout
M Ofner, M Laffin, M Herbert, MT Do

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsCanadian Pain Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLaundryMedical emergencyEmergency medicineFamily medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the introduction of convenient new laundry packets to North American in 2012 there have been more frequent reports of child injuries related to liquid detergent packets. A recent study reported 17,000 cases gathered by poison control centres across the United States including several hundred serious injuries and at least one death. In Canada there have been more than 100 cases seen in paediatric emergency departments. To obtain more information on Canadian children injured in such incidents the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP) conducted a one-time survey of paediatricians across Canada. To obtain more information on Canadian children injured in such incidents the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP) conducted a one-time survey of paediatricians across Canada. The survey gathered information on number of cases seen, age groups most affected, types of exposures and injuries sustained point of access, treatment and disposition of the children. In August 2014, the CPSP sent a one-time survey to approximately 2,500 active practicing paediatricians and subspecialists enrolled in the Program. CPSP gathered information on 54 children with injuries following exposure to single-load liquid detergent packets treated by paediatricians within the past year (2014). Half (56%) were less than 2 years of age and 43% were aged 2–4 years. All except 2 of the children were treated by reporting physicians in emergency departments (69%) and in-patient settings (28%). Three quarters of the incidents involved exposure to liquid detergent packets for laundry and the remainder were for dishwashers. Among cases where the point of access was known, two thirds of the children accessed detergent packets directly from the manufacturer's original package or container and another 20% found a packet on the floor or lying around. Almost all the children (47 or 88%) were treated following ingestion or had exposure to the gastrointestinal tract, six sustained ocular injuries, four had dermal exposure and three suffered pulmonary exposure. The injuries and symptoms reported in order of frequency include: nausea and vomiting, chemical burns (mouth, esophagus or skin), pulmonary toxicity, conjunctivitis, respiratory distress, corneal ulcer or keratitis, and central nervous system depression. Twenty-five patients (46%) were admitted to hospital and of these, at least six were treated in intensive care units. Another six patients (11%) were treated and released with referral for medical follow up. Twenty-one patients (39%) were not seriously injured and released without need for medical follow up. Liquid detergent packets pose a hazard for young children and exposures resulted in serious injuries. Prevention may be enhanced by greater parent and caregiver awareness of the hazard combined with vigilance in safe storage of household chemicals, including detergent packets.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention→French-language works237,207→