MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400955406 · doi:10.1186/s13643-024-02612-2

Risk factors for severe and fatal childhood unintentional injury: a systematic review protocol

2024· review· en· W4400955406 on OpenAlexaffabout
Émilie Beaulieu, Norma Maria Perez Herrera, Amélie Boutin

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsThe Quebec Population Health Research NetworkUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Injury preventionPoison controlMedical emergencyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Unintentional injuries are a leading cause of death among children aged 1-19 years worldwide. Systematic reviews assessing various risk factors for different childhood injuries have been published previously. However, most of the related literature does not distinguish minor from severe or fatal injuries. This study aims to describe and summarize the current knowledge on the determinants of severe and fatal childhood unintentional injuries and to discuss the differences between risk factors for all injuries (including minor injuries) and severe and fatal injuries. The study also aims to quantify the reduction in childhood injuries associated with a reduction in exposure to some of the identified risk factors in the Canadian population. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Observational and experimental cohort studies assessing children and adolescents aged ≤ 19 years old and determinants of severe and fatal unintentional injury, such as personal behaviors, family and environmental characteristics, and socioeconomic and geographic context, will be eligible. The main outcome will be a composite of any severe or fatal unintentional injuries (including burns, drowning, transport-related injuries, and falls). Any severity measurement scale will be accepted as long as severe cases require at least one hospital admission. Two authors will independently screen for inclusion, extract data, and assess the quality of the data using the Cochrane ROBINS-E tool. Meta-analysis will be performed using random effects models. Subgroup analyses will examine age subgroups and high- vs low-income countries. Sensitivity analysis will be conducted after restricting analyses to studies with a low risk of bias. Attributable fractions will be computed to assess the burden of identified risk factors in the Canadian population. DISCUSSION: Given the numerous determinants of childhood injuries and the challenges that may be involved in identifying which individuals should be prioritized for injury prevention efforts, this evidence may help to inform the identification of high-risk children and prevention interventions, considering the disproportionate consequences of severe and fatal injuries. This evidence may also help pediatric healthcare providers prioritize counseling messaging. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023493322.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.359 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207