Emergency Department Presentations by Children in Remote Australia: A Population-based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Aboriginal leaders invited us to examine the frequency and reasons for emergency department (ED) presentations by children in remote Western Australia, where Prenatal Alcohol Exposure (PAE) is common. Methods. ED presentations (2007-11 inclusive) were examined for all children born in the Fitzroy Valley in 2002-03. Results. ED data for 127/134 (94.7%) children (95% Aboriginal) showed 1058 presentations over 5-years. Most (81%) had at least 1 presentation (median 9.0, range 1-50). Common presentations included: screening/follow-up/social reasons (16.0%), injury (15.1%), diseases of the ear (14.9%), skin (13.8%), respiratory tract (13.4%), and infectious and parasitic diseases (9.8%). PAE and higher presentations rates were associated. Commonly associated socio-economic factors were household over-crowding, financial and food insecurity. Conclusion. Children in very remote Fitzroy Crossing communities have high rates of preventable ED presentations, especially those with PAE. Support for culturally appropriate preventative programs and improved access to primary health services need to be provided in remote Australia.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".