Caregivers’ knowledge about children's paracetamol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although safe, paracetamol, commonly used in children, can cause adverse events if not administered correctly. This research aimed to investigate caregivers' knowledge about children's paracetamol. A convenience sample of caregivers who had purchased Children's Panadol were asked to complete an online survey, assessing their knowledge of paracetamol. Most of the 174 respondents were female (93.7%), highly‐educated (72.4%) with adequate functional health literacy (85.6%). Almost all respondents correctly identified that Children's Panadol contained paracetamol (96.6%). However, approximately a quarter of them did not know the maximum daily dose (26.4%), just under half (46%) did not know how many days this dose could be safely given, and over one‐third (37.4%) did not know that liver toxicity could result from overdose. These findings suggest that adult caregivers administering paracetamol to children have gaps in their knowledge. Strategies to help improve caregiver's knowledge about the correct and safe administration of children's paracetamol need to be considered.
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".