MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990809438 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz145

Childhood unintentional injury: The impact of family income, education level, occupation status, and other measures of socioeconomic status. A systematic review

2019· review· en· W2990809438 on OpenAlexafffund
Afifa Mahboob, Sarah A. Richmond, Joshua Harkins, Alison Macpherson

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoYork University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCINAHLSocioeconomic statusMedicinePsycINFOInjury preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthMEDLINESuicide preventionSystematic reviewHuman factors and ergonomicsPublic healthEnvironmental healthPsychiatryPopulationPsychological interventionNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Unintentional injuries represent a substantial public health burden among children and adolescents, and previous evidence suggests that there are disparities in injury by socioeconomic status (SES). This paper reports on a systematic review of literature on injury rates among children and adolescents by measures of SES. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using six electronic databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, EMBASE, and SportsDiscus. This review considered children ages 19 years and under and publications between 1997 and 2017-representing an update since the last systematic review examined this specific question. Fifty-four articles were summarized based on study and participant descriptions, outcome and exposure, statistical tests used, effect estimates, and overall significance. RESULTS: Most articles addressed risk factors across all injury mechanisms; however, some focused particularly on burns/scalds, road traffic injuries, falls/drowning cases, and playground/sports injuries. Other studies reported on specific injury types including traumatic dental injuries, traumatic brain injuries, and fractures. The studies were of moderate quality, with a median of 15.5 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.34 to 15.66) out of 19. Thirty-two studies found an inverse association between SES and childhood unintentional injury, three found a positive association while twenty were not significant or failed to report effect measures. CONCLUSION: Given the variability in definition of the exposure (SES) and outcome (injury), the results of this review were mixed; however, the majority of studies supported a relationship between low SES and increased injury risk. Public health practice must consider SES, and other measures of health equity, in childhood injury prevention programming, and policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations65
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207