106 Neighbourhood socioeconomic deprivation and assault injuries in urban youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction/Background Youth violence is a major global public health concern. Assault injuries are a major cause of trauma among youth, yet the causes for and medical consequences of assault victimization in this group remain uncertain. Objectives Using data from the third-largest urban area in Canada, we sought to describe the demographic, temporal and geographic influences on the incidence of youth assault injuries. Design/Methods We performed a population-based cross sectional study of Canadian youth aged 10 to 24 years seeking emergency medical care between April 2012 and March 2018 at any of the 16 hospitals in a major Canadian metropolitan area. Injury characteristics were described using graphical and statistical techniques. Neighbourhood material and social deprivation indices were examined as independent predictors of the population incidence of youth assault injury using negative binomial regression and geospatial methods. Results A total of 2,784 assaulted youth sought emergency medical care during the 6-year study interval, corresponding to an incidence rate of 101 youth assault injuries per 100,000 person-years. Assaulted youth were most commonly males between 20 and 24 years of age. Prior diagnoses of substance use and mental health disorders were common. Examination of temporal variation in the incidence of assault injury revealed a 103-fold difference between the riskiest and safest hours of the week (incident rate ratio, 103). The risk of youth assault injury in the most materially deprived quintile of neighbourhoods was more than four-fold greater than that in the wealthiest quintile (incident rate ratio per quintile increase, 1.42; 95%CI [1.27, 1.59]; p <0.001), and the risk of youth assault injury in the most socially deprived quintile of neighbourhoods was more than twelve-fold greater than that in the least deprived quintile (incident rate ratio per quintile increase, 1.88; 95%CI [1.69, 2.11]; p <0.001). Conclusion Assault injuries among youth vary substantially across time and space. Targeted violence prevention interventions might focus on weekend evenings and on socioeconomically deprived neighbourhoods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".