• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Who's prepared for advocacy? Another inverse law.谁准备好进行宣传了?另一条反比定律。
Inj Prev. 1995 Sep;1(3):152-4. doi: 10.1136/ip.1.3.152.
2
Adult accompaniment and the risk of pedestrian injury on the school-home journey.成人陪同与学生上下学途中行人受伤风险
Inj Prev. 1995 Dec;1(4):242-4. doi: 10.1136/ip.1.4.242.
3
Effect of environmental factors on risk of injury of child pedestrians by motor vehicles: a case-control study.环境因素对儿童行人机动车伤害风险的影响:一项病例对照研究。
BMJ. 1995 Jan 14;310(6972):91-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6972.91.
4
Sensory deficit and the risk of pedestrian injury.感觉功能障碍与行人受伤风险
Inj Prev. 1995 Mar;1(1):12-4. doi: 10.1136/ip.1.1.12.
5
Auckland children's exposure to risk as pedestrians.奥克兰儿童作为行人面临的风险
N Z Med J. 1994 Aug 24;107(984):331-3.
6
Sole parenthood and the risk of child pedestrian injury.单亲家庭与儿童行人受伤风险
J Paediatr Child Health. 1994 Dec;30(6):530-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.1994.tb00727.x.
7
Geographies of inequality: child pedestrian injury and walking school buses in Auckland, New Zealand.不平等的地域分布:新西兰奥克兰儿童行人受伤情况与步行校车
Soc Sci Med. 2005 Jan;60(1):61-9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.04.015.
8
Driveway-related child pedestrian injuries: a case-control study.与车道相关的儿童行人伤害:一项病例对照研究。
Pediatrics. 1995 Mar;95(3):405-8.
9
Paediatric pedestrian trauma: the danger after school.儿童行人创伤:放学后的危险
J Paediatr Child Health. 2008 Sep;44(9):488-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2008.01330.x. Epub 2008 Jun 28.
10
Child pedestrian injury rates: the importance of "exposure to risk" relating to socioeconomic and ethnic differences, in Auckland, New Zealand.儿童行人受伤率:新西兰奥克兰地区与社会经济和种族差异相关的“风险暴露”的重要性
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1996 Apr;50(2):162-5. doi: 10.1136/jech.50.2.162.

引用本文的文献

1
How willing are parents to improve pedestrian safety in their community?父母们在多大程度上愿意改善其社区的行人安全状况?
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003 Dec;57(12):951-5. doi: 10.1136/jech.57.12.951.
2
Accidental injury: risk and preventative interventions.意外伤害:风险与预防干预措施
Arch Dis Child. 1997 Jul;77(1):28-31. doi: 10.1136/adc.77.1.28.

本文引用的文献

1
Community development in health promotion: empowerment or regulation?健康促进中的社区发展:赋权还是监管?
Aust J Public Health. 1994 Jun;18(2):213-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.1994.tb00230.x.
2
Preventing child pedestrian injury: pedestrian education or traffic calming?预防儿童行人伤害:行人教育还是交通 calming? (此处“traffic calming”可译为“交通稳静化”,整体是在探讨预防儿童行人受伤的两种方式:行人教育与交通稳静化)
Aust J Public Health. 1994 Jun;18(2):209-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.1994.tb00228.x.
3
Effect of environmental factors on risk of injury of child pedestrians by motor vehicles: a case-control study.环境因素对儿童行人机动车伤害风险的影响:一项病例对照研究。
BMJ. 1995 Jan 14;310(6972):91-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6972.91.
4
The inverse care law.反向关怀法则
Lancet. 1971 Feb 27;1(7696):405-12. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(71)92410-x.
5
The epidemiology of road accidents in childhood.儿童道路交通事故的流行病学
Am J Public Health. 1987 Mar;77(3):358-60. doi: 10.2105/ajph.77.3.358.
6
Speed management and traffic calming in urban areas in Europe: a historical view.欧洲城市地区的速度管理与交通稳静化:历史视角
Accid Anal Prev. 1992 Feb;24(1):57-65. doi: 10.1016/0001-4575(92)90072-q.

谁准备好进行宣传了?另一条反比定律。

Who's prepared for advocacy? Another inverse law.

作者信息

Roberts I

机构信息

Department of Community Paediatric Research (C-538), Montreal Children's Hospital, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

Inj Prev. 1995 Sep;1(3):152-4. doi: 10.1136/ip.1.3.152.

DOI:10.1136/ip.1.3.152
PMID:9346016
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1067582/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To examine the characteristics of parents responding to a petition calling for greater efforts to ensure the safety of children as pedestrians and to contrast factors predictive of advocacy with risk factors for child pedestrian injury.

SETTING

The Auckland region of New Zealand.

METHODS

Parents participating in the Auckland Child Pedestrian Injury Study, a community based case-control study, were invited to support a series of recommendations based on the study results, by signing and returning a petition that was to be delivered to the New Zealand Minister for Transport. Characteristics of petitioners were determined by linking their petition responses to the study questionnaires using an unique identifier. The characteristics of petitioners and nonpetitioners were summarised using odds ratios.

RESULTS

31% of parents signed and returned the petition; 19% were parents of cases and 36% were parents of controls. The sociodemographic groups whose children were at the lowest risk of pedestrian injury were the most likely to return the petition. Children in the most disadvantaged socioeconomic group and children of Pacific Island parents were at greatest risk of injury but the parents of these children were the least likely to respond to the petition.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency with which parents advocate for child safety varies inversely with the need for it. Models of health promotion based on community ownership and empowerment alone are unlikely to address the steep socioeconomic gradients in childhood injury mortality.

摘要

目的

调查对一份呼吁加大力度确保儿童行人安全的请愿书做出回应的家长的特征,并对比预测宣传行为的因素与儿童行人受伤的风险因素。

地点

新西兰奥克兰地区。

方法

邀请参与奥克兰儿童行人受伤研究(一项基于社区的病例对照研究)的家长,通过签署并返还一份将递交给新西兰交通部长的请愿书,来支持基于研究结果提出的一系列建议。通过使用唯一标识符将他们的请愿书回复与研究问卷相联系,确定请愿者的特征。使用比值比总结请愿者和未请愿者的特征。

结果

31%的家长签署并返还了请愿书;其中19%是病例组儿童的家长,36%是对照组儿童的家长。其子女行人受伤风险最低的社会人口群体最有可能返还请愿书。处于最不利社会经济群体的儿童以及太平洋岛屿家长的子女受伤风险最大,但这些儿童的家长对请愿书做出回应的可能性最小。

结论

家长倡导儿童安全的频率与实际需求呈反比。仅基于社区自主和赋权的健康促进模式不太可能解决儿童受伤死亡率方面巨大的社会经济梯度问题。