SynthesisZhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences2025
Risk assessment tools for 0-6 years old children unintentional injuries: A systematic literature analysis.
Synthesis in Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesInjuries are the leading cause of death among children and adolescents. Although numerous risk assessment tools for unintentional injuries in children have been developed and published both domestically and internationally, there is currently no global consensus on standardized use. This study aims to systematically characterize existing unintentional injury risk assessment tools for children aged 0-6 years, with the goal of informing scientific tool selection and optimization.
methodsRelevant literature published up to January 2025 was retrieved from CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, and Web of Science. An information extraction form was developed to gather data on the basic features of each assessment tool, assessment format, scoring methods and criteria, dimensions assessed, reliability and validity, and types of unintentional injuries covered.
resultsA total of 50 risk assessment tools for unintentional injuries among children aged 0-6 years were included. Among them, 35 tools assessed two or more types of unintentional injuries. Regarding assessment format, 38 tools relied on caregiver self-report, 2 on investigator interviews, 3 on direct observation by investigators, and 7 used multiple methods. The tools covered four major dimensions: knowledge, attitude, behavior, and environment. Eleven tools covered 3 dimensions, while only one tool addressed all 4. Nineteen tools provided clear scoring methods, 14 included criteria for risk determination, and only 11 had both scoring methods and risk criteria. Twenty-eight tools lacked both. Twenty-two tools had been evaluated for reliability and/or validity. Among the 25 English-language tools, only 3 had been translated into Chinese.
conclusionsCurrently, no existing tool comprehensively assesses all major types of unintentional injuries for children under six years of age. It is recommended that practitioners select appropriate tools based on specific needs. In addition, improvements should be pursued, such as translating and validating English-language tools, developing quantitative scoring methods and criteria for tools tailored to Chinese children for important but underrepresented injury types (e.g., road traffic injuries, drowning).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.