Road traffic injuries and substance use in Latin America: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study is to identify and report the epidemiological patterns of substance use on fatal and non-fatal road traffic injuries (RTIs) in Latin America. A systematic review identified all published studies from January 2010 through October 2020. Twenty-eight studies were included from PubMed and SciELO databases. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. The prevalence of alcohol consumption in fatal RTIs in studies where 100% of the target population were tested varies from 15.3% up to 55% in Brazil; with respect to non-fatal RTIs, it varies from 9.1% in car drivers in Brazil to 24.1% in emergency patients in Argentina. The most studied drug other than alcohol was cannabis, present in 6.5% up to 20.8% of non-fatal RTIs cases, but lower rates of testing for drugs was reported. Few studies reported epidemiological association measures. This article shows that scientific production on substance use and RTIs in the region is limited and reports the prevalence of substance use, with few estimates of the relative risk of drug use and RTIs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".