MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802838588 · doi:10.7939/r3vh5p

A population-based comparison of injuries among farm children to non-farm children in Alberta, 1999-2010

2014· article· en· W2802838588 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyungsu Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationBusinessEnvironmental healthGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives - To systematically review literature on rural-urban differences in pediatric injury incidence and to examine incidence of all-cause injury, agricultural injury, and injury-related health care utilization for farm children compared to several groups of non-farm children under 18 years of age in Alberta, Canada. Methods – A systematic review examined population-based observational studies published from 1970 to August 2013, that compared rates or health care outcomes of injury between rural and urban children (<18) living in Canada or the United States. Three of population-based retrospective cohort studies followed farm, rural, First Nations (FN), urban children from 1999 to 2010 to examine incidence of injury and related health services using the linkage of four administrative health databases (data from physician visits to deaths). Person-time incidence rates and adjusted hazard ratios were calculated based on injury episode. Results – Systematic review demonstrated that rural children sustained a higher rate of overall injury, particularly from MVC and suicide than urban children. Primary studies showed farm and rural children, especially rural FN children, had higher rates and greater utilizations of overall injury, especially for severe injuries, than urban children. This trend was consistent for most injury mechanisms but more notably for other land transport (e.g., ATVs, animal riding, agricultural vehicle-related injuries), natural/environmental (e.g., bees, insects, animals-related), and unintentional firearm-related injuries. Farm and rural non-FN children were at a greater risk of agricultural injuries, more outstandingly for farm-animal and machinery-related injuries, than rural FN and urban children. Agricultural injuries appeared to be more unintentional and lethal. Rural FN children, followed by rural non-FN and farm children, experienced greater utilization of higher levels of medical facilities, thinner shapes of injury pyramid, and greater proportions of pre-hospital deaths. Conclusions – Greater burden of injury for farm and rural children and specific patterns per group indicate a need for targeted and specialized injury prevention strategies for higher-risk mechanisms in each group, attention for agricultural injury controls to extended populations, comprehensive intervention strategies for underlying inter-related causes of injury in rural areas, and an advanced pediatric trauma care for serious injuries the ED for efficient and timely care in rural areas.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.164 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207