2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.08.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of kiosk-based tailoring to promote household safety behaviors in an urban pediatric primary care practice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
61
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
2
61
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This included three RCTs (Johnston, Britt, D'Ambrosio, Mueller, & Rivara, 2000;Paul et al, 1994;Woolf, Lewander, Filippone, & Lovejoy, 1987) evaluating safety education, and provision of ipecac with effect sizes ranging from OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.77À4.90 (Woolf et al, 1987) to OR 16.91, 95% CI 6.25À45.78 (Johnston et al, 2000) and one RCT (McDonald et al, 2005) evaluating tailored safety education (OR 5.57 95% CI 1.93À16.03). Three CBAs evaluating community programmes providing safety education, safety education with the provision of ipecac, safety education with home inspections and safety education with modification in the home (Lacouture, Minisci, Gouveia, & Lovejoy, 1978;Petridou, Tolma, Dessypris, & Tricholpoulos, 1997;Schwarz et al, 1993) reported significantly more families in the intervention group possessed syrup of ipecac with effect sizes ranging from OR 10.21, 95% CI 2.31À45.83 (Petridou et al, 1997) to OR 22.24, 95% CI 13.53À36.54 (Schwarz et al, 1993).…”
Section: Interventions Promoting Use Of Child Resistantmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This included three RCTs (Johnston, Britt, D'Ambrosio, Mueller, & Rivara, 2000;Paul et al, 1994;Woolf, Lewander, Filippone, & Lovejoy, 1987) evaluating safety education, and provision of ipecac with effect sizes ranging from OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.77À4.90 (Woolf et al, 1987) to OR 16.91, 95% CI 6.25À45.78 (Johnston et al, 2000) and one RCT (McDonald et al, 2005) evaluating tailored safety education (OR 5.57 95% CI 1.93À16.03). Three CBAs evaluating community programmes providing safety education, safety education with the provision of ipecac, safety education with home inspections and safety education with modification in the home (Lacouture, Minisci, Gouveia, & Lovejoy, 1978;Petridou, Tolma, Dessypris, & Tricholpoulos, 1997;Schwarz et al, 1993) reported significantly more families in the intervention group possessed syrup of ipecac with effect sizes ranging from OR 10.21, 95% CI 2.31À45.83 (Petridou et al, 1997) to OR 22.24, 95% CI 13.53À36.54 (Schwarz et al, 1993).…”
Section: Interventions Promoting Use Of Child Resistantmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…New computer technology has the potential to reduce the time demands on providers, and it has demonstrated promise for other health problems [14][15][16] and for injury prevention in primary care settings. 17,18 Only 1 study could be found that evaluated this technology in an ED, and it focused on alcohol misuse among injured adolescents. 19 Therefore, investigating the application of computer technology to early childhood injury prevention in the ED setting is both timely and important.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, the sample was relatively homogeneous, comprising many Caucasian, upper-income and fairly well-educated parents. Tailoring messages to specific sample characteristics can enhance effectiveness of interventions,4 20 21 and this probably applies also to the images accompanying those messages. Hence, extending this research to examine how features of images affect parents’ appraisals of risk in more diverse populations is an important next step.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%