Literature DB >> 9346016

Who's prepared for advocacy? Another inverse law.

I Roberts1.   

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 9346016      PMCID: PMC1067582          DOI: 10.1136/ip.1.3.152

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Inj Prev        ISSN: 1353-8047            Impact factor:   2.399


  6 in total

1.  Speed management and traffic calming in urban areas in Europe: a historical view.

Authors:  K Kjemtrup; L Herrstedt
Journal:  Accid Anal Prev       Date:  1992-02

2.  The epidemiology of road accidents in childhood.

Authors:  I B Pless; R Verreault; L Arsenault; J Y Frappier; J Stulginskas
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  The inverse care law.

Authors:  J T Hart
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1971-02-27       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Preventing child pedestrian injury: pedestrian education or traffic calming?

Authors:  I Roberts; T Ashton; R Dunn; T Lee-Joe
Journal:  Aust J Public Health       Date:  1994-06

5.  Community development in health promotion: empowerment or regulation?

Authors:  A R Petersen
Journal:  Aust J Public Health       Date:  1994-06

6.  Effect of environmental factors on risk of injury of child pedestrians by motor vehicles: a case-control study.

Authors:  I Roberts; R Norton; R Jackson; R Dunn; I Hassall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-01-14
  6 in total
  2 in total

1.  Accidental injury: risk and preventative interventions.

Authors:  I van Weeghel; D Kendrick; P Marsh
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  How willing are parents to improve pedestrian safety in their community?

Authors:  D Bishai; P Mahoney; S DeFrancesco; B Guyer; A Carlson Gielen
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.710

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.