MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784403621 · doi:10.1111/jrh.12292

National Public Health Data Systems in the United States: Applications to Child Agricultural Injury Surveillance

2018· article· en· W2784403621 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Marlenga, Richard L. Berg, William Pickett

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rural Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
KeywordsPublic health surveillancePublic healthInjury surveillanceMedicinePoison controlOccupational safety and healthScope (computer science)Environmental healthInjury preventionMedical emergencyBusinessComputer securityPublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The United States has no comprehensive national surveillance system for fatal or nonfatal child agricultural injuries. Thus, important knowledge gaps exist about recurrent injury patterns that could provide targeted focus for prevention efforts. The purpose of this study was to explore existing US public health data systems to determine their utility with respect to informing child agricultural injury surveillance and primary prevention. METHODS: Public health data systems were selected if they: (1) were national in scope, (2) were active and ongoing, (3) included physical injuries, and (4) contained a "farm" location variable. Data systems explored included National Emergency Medical Services Information System, National Trauma Data Bank, National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-All Injury Program, and National Vital Statistics System-Multiple Cause File. FINDINGS: Each data system contained substantial information per case with the number of fields ranging from 77 to 127. Beyond basic demographic information about the injured child, there were many injury descriptors, but few commonalities across systems. The most striking finding was the uniform absence of information on injury circumstances; that is, why and how the injury occurred, which is fundamental to planning and evaluating prevention initiatives. CONCLUSIONS: Although these public health data systems captured many details regarding medical aspects of the injury, they included little information on circumstances leading to injury, thus limiting their utility for child agricultural injury surveillance and primary prevention initiatives. We recommend any child agricultural injury data collection tool formally incorporate a structured narrative so underlying circumstances leading to injury events are documented.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.091
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.091
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rural HealthSame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207