MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

11.25 The association between socio-economic status and Emergency Department visits for concussion

2024· article· en· W4391384431 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alison Macpherson, Joshua Harkins, Lauren E. Sergio

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionSocioeconomic statusEmergency departmentMedicinePoison controlDemographyInjury preventionPsychological interventionPopulationMedical emergencyEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To examine the association between socio-economic status and Emergency Department (ED) visits for concussions in children and youth in Ontario, Canada. Design Longitudinal population-based study using administrative data from all ED visits. Setting All ED visits in Ontario, Canada. Participants Children and youth residing in Ontario. Interventions (or Assessment of Risk Factors) The rate per 100000 children was calculated from 2008 to 2015. Socio-economic status was defined by a marginalization index and grouped into quintiles from the highest to the lowest. Comparisons were made over the 7-year period and by quintile. Outcome Measures ICD-10 diagnosis of concussion. Main Results There were 5,889 concussions reported at an emergency department in 2008, and 14,906 in 2015. The rate among the lowest socioeconomic class quintile was 5.23 per 100000 person years in 2008, and 7.12 for the highest socioeconomic class quintile, and 8.64 and 11.07 respectively in 2015. Conclusions Rates of ED visits for concussions increased among children over time. However, children in higher income quintiles consistently visited EDs for concussion more than children from lower quintiles. This may be due to the increased opportunity wealthier children have to engage in contact sports such as hockey and football or may reflect differences in the likelihood of seeking care. Policies related to awareness and identification of concussions need to be considered for all children and may need to be improved for those in poorer areas.

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)0.002
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 score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207