Protecting only white children: the impact of child restraint legislation in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2010, Brazil introduced child restraint legislation (CRL). We assessed the effectiveness of CRL in reducing child (aged 0-8 years) injuries and fatalities by race. We performed an evaluation study with an interrupted time-series design. METHODS: We measured the effect of CRL on two outcomes-number of child deaths and number of child injured in traffic collisions per child population, stratified by race, from 2008 to 2014. We controlled for time, unemployment rate and oil consumption (barrels/day in thousands). RESULTS: The CRL was associated with a 3% reduction in the rate of child injuries among whites (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.97; 95% CI: 0.96-0.99), but no reduction in child injuries among non-whites (IRR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.99-1.00). In the first month after the implementation of Brazil's CRL we observed a 39% reduction in all child fatalities (IRR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.44-0.84), including a 52% reduction among whites (IRR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.33-0.68), but no reduction in non-white fatalities (IRR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.55-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the hypothesis that socially advantaged populations were more likely to consistently adopt and employ restraint devices following the reform. Countries should also consider complementary policies that facilitate an equitable distribution of safety devices that reach vulnerable populations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".