Trial reportCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique
Preventing product-related injuries: a randomized controlled trial of poster alerts.
Trial report in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Home safety education and provision of safety equipment for injury prevention.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Outcomes after injury prevention counselling in a paediatric office setting: a 25-year review.BMJ paediatrics open · 2018Article
- Protecting children from dangerous products: fundamental change needed.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Product Safety Programme (PSP) of Health Canada is responsible for preventing product-related injuries. If PSP decides a product is dangerous, it can publicize its dangers, prohibit, or control its distribution; but for child products, the preferred option is to publicize its concerns. In the past, this included sending posters to paediatricians' offices and, more recently, placing alerts on the PSP website. This study examines the effectiveness of this process.
methods15 Montreal paediatricians participated in a modified crossover randomized trial. During a randomly chosen intervention week, two product-related notices were posted in the paediatricians' waiting area. In the following or preceding week, these notices did not appear. Parents were interviewed by telephone to determine if they saw the posters and acted on the information received.
resultsWe interviewed 808 parents (86%) of the 940 who agreed to participate. Of these, only 16% of the intervention and less than 1% of the control group reported seeing the posters. There were no differences in reported changes in behaviours related to the notices. These findings are unchanged after taking account of socio-economic status. No parents cited the posters, websites, or paediatricians as their main source of information about dangerous products.
conclusionProduct safety notices, whether sent to paediatricians' practices or posted on a website, cannot be relied upon to reach parents of preschool age children. Other approaches require consideration, such as increasing the power of PSP to regulate product safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17896734PMC6976268What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.