MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308634998 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/irac140

Epidemiology and Etiology of Pediatric Burns in Iran

2022· article· en· W4308634998 on OpenAlexaff
Tooran Bagheri, Mohammad Javad Fatemi, Soodabeh Hoveidamanesh, Tayyeb Ghadimi, Marzieh Asgari, Arya Rahbar, Hossein Rahbar, Mahnoush Momeni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpidemiologyInjury preventionEtiologyShahidSuicide preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsIncidence (geometry)PediatricsMedical emergencyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pediatric burns have long-term physical, psychological, economic, and social consequences for the patient and family. This study was designed to investigate the epidemiology, causes, and mechanism of pediatric burns in Iran, considering the impact the cultural and environmental differences of countries have on burn incidence. This study is a survey study that was performed from 2016 to 2017 on patients referred to Shahid Motahari hospital. Patients in the study included hospitalized children aged 0-18 years who themselves or their parents were able to answer questions. Questions were answered in the categories of the demographic characteristics of the child and parents, epidemiological characteristics of the burn, information on socio-economic and education status, and the underlying causes of the accident. Most burns occurred in the age group less than two years of age and in boys. The most common cause of burns was hot liquids. Collision with containers containing hot liquids inside the kitchen, collision with containers containing hot liquids outside the kitchen space, and overturning containers containing hot liquids were the most common mechanisms of burns. Flame burns were the most common cause of burns in school-age children. Half of the parents had an elementary level or lower education. Economic, social, and cultural conditions of families, parents' education, and access to preventive education are related to the extent and mechanism of burns. Paying attention to epidemiology and recognizing the main causes of child burns plays an important role in designing and planning preventive measures.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207