MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229609915 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/iraa024.335

754 Social Determinants Associated with Paediatric Burn Injury: A Population Based, Case-control Study

2020· article· en· W4229609915 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Padalko, Justin Gawaziuk, Sarvesh Logsetty

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences CentreManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBurn injuryPopulationLogistic regressionTotal body surface areaInjury preventionDemographyCohortPoison controlOccupational safety and healthGerontologyEnvironmental healthSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Children are disproportionately represented as victims of burn injury compared to adults. Life-long sequelae post-burn manifest as increased rates of mental and physical illness, substance abuse, and suicide. Social determinants of health (SDoH) influence risk of injury, however the extent and influence of SDoH on burn injury is less clear. To determine which social determinants influence burn injury in children, a retrospective case-control study was conducted. Methods Children (< 17 years of age) admitted to a regional burn centre between January 1 1999 and March 30 2017 were matched based on age, sex and geographic location 1:5 with an uninjured cohort. Population level administrative data describing the SDoH, at the regional administrative multifaceted data repository were compared between the cohorts. Thirteen SDoH were chosen based on a systematic review conducted by the research team. Results No significant differences existed in descriptive statistics between the burn and control cohorts. Mean age at burn injury = 5.46 (± 5.23), average TBSA (%) = 10.5 (± 13.4). The most common mechanism of burn injury was scald (42.03%) Upon multivariable logistic regression, children: from a low-income household (O.R. 1.97 (1.46, 2.65)); in foster care (O.R. 1.57 (1.11, 2.21)); from a family that received income assistance (O.R. 1.71 (1.33, 2.19)); or born to a teen mother (O.R. 1.43 (1.13, 1.81)) were associated with an increased risk of burn injury. Conclusions This study identified SDoH associated with an increased risk of burn injury. This case-control study supports the finding that children from a low-income household, children in care, from a family that received income assistance, and children born to a teen mother are at an elevated risk of burn injury. Applicability of Research to Practice Identifying children at increased potential risk provides an opportunity to prevent burn injuries, bypassing the associated long-term physical disfigurement, life-long mental health consequences and mortality. This study also has merit in maximizing the efficiency of a burn prevention budget through targeted burn safety and risk reduction programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207