Home safety measures and the risk of unintentional injury among young children: a multicentre case–control study

BACKGROUND: Young children may sustain injuries when exposed to certain hazards in the home. To better understand the relation between several childproofing strategies and the risk of injuries to children in the home, we undertook a multicentre case–control study in which we compared hazards in the homes of children with and without injuries. METHODS: We conducted this case-control study using records from 5 pediatric hospital emergency departments for the 2-year period 1995–1996. The 351 case subjects were children aged 7 years and less who presented with injuries from falls, burns or scalds, ingestions or choking. The matched control subjects were children who presented during the same period with acute non-injury-related conditions. A home visitor, blinded to case-control status, assessed 19 injury hazards at the children's homes. RESULTS: Hazards found in the homes included baby walkers (21% of homes with infants), no functioning smoke alarm (17% of homes) and no fire extinguisher (51% of homes). Cases did not differ from controls in the mean proportion of home hazards. After controlling for siblings, maternal education and employment, we found that cases differed from controls for 5 hazards: the presence of a baby walker (odds ratio [OR] 9.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–71.0), the presence of choking hazards within a child's reach (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.0–3.7), no child-resistant lids in bathroom (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0–2.5), no smoke alarm (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4–7.7) and no functioning smoke alarm (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.0–2.8). INTERPRETATION: Homes of children with injuries differed from those of children without injuries in the proportions of specific hazards for falls, choking, poisoning and burns, with a striking difference noted for the presence of a baby walker. In addition to counselling parents about specific hazards, clinicians should consider that the presence of some hazards may indicate an increased risk for home injuries beyond those directly related to the hazard found. Families with any home hazard may be candidates for interventions to childproof against other types of home hazards

Key Findings and Implications of a Recent Systematic Review of the Potential Adverse Effects of Caffeine Consumption in Healthy Adults, Pregnant Women, Adolescents, and Children

In 2016–2017, we conducted and published a systematic review on caffeine safety that set out to determine whether conclusions that were presented in the heavily cited Health Canada assessment, remain supported by more recent data. To that end, we reviewed data from 380 studies published between June 2001 and June 2015, which were identified from an initial batch of over 5000 articles through a stringent search and evaluation process. In the current paper, we use plain language to summarize our process and findings, with the intent of sharing additional context for broader reach to the general public. We addressed whether caffeine doses previously determined not to be associated with adverse effects by Health Canada (400 mg/day for healthy adults, 300 mg/day for pregnant women, 2.5 mg/kg body weight/day for adolescents and children, and 10 g/day for acute effects) remain appropriate for five outcome areas (acute toxicity, cardiovascular toxicity, bone & calcium effects, behavior, and development and reproduction) in healthy adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children. We used a weight-of-evidence approach to draw conclusions for each of the five outcomes, as well as more specific endpoints within those outcomes, which considered study quality, consistency, level of adversity, and magnitude of response. In general, updated evidence confirms the levels of intake that were put forth by Health Canada in 2003 as not being associated with any adverse health effects, and our results support a shift in caffeine research from healthy to sensitive populations

Systematic review of the potential adverse effects of caffeine consumption in healthy adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children

To date, one of the most heavily cited assessments of caffeine safety in the peer-reviewed literature is that issued by Health Canada (Nawrot et al., 2003). Since then, >10,000 papers have been published related to caffeine, including hundreds of reviews on specific human health effects; however, to date, none have compared the wide range of topics evaluated by Nawrot et al. (2003). Thus, as an update to this foundational publication, we conducted a systematic review of data on potential adverse effects of caffeine published from 2001 to June 2015. Subject matter experts and research team participants developed five PECO (population, exposure, comparator, and outcome) questions to address five types of outcomes (acute toxicity, cardiovascular toxicity, bone and calcium effects, behavior, and development and reproduction) in four healthy populations (adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children) relative to caffeine intake doses determined not to be associated with adverse effects by Health Canada (comparators: 400 mg/day for adults [10 g for lethality], 300 mg/day for pregnant women, and 2.5 mg/kg/day for children and adolescents). The a priori search strategy identified >5000 articles that were screened, with 381 meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria for the five outcomes (pharmacokinetics was addressed contextually, adding 46 more studies). Data were extracted by the research team and rated for risk of bias and indirectness (internal and external validity). Selected no- and low-effect intakes were assessed relative to the population-specific comparator. Conclusions were drawn for the body of evidence for each outcome, as well as endpoints within an outcome, using a weight of evidence approach. When the total body of evidence was evaluated and when study quality, consistency, level of adversity, and magnitude of response were considered, the evidence generally supports that consumption of up to 400 mg caffeine/day in healthy adults is not associated with overt, adverse cardiovascular effects, behavioral effects, reproductive and developmental effects, acute effects, or bone status. Evidence also supports consumption of up to 300 mg caffeine/day in healthy pregnant women as an intake that is generally not associated with adverse reproductive and developmental effects. Limited data were identified for child and adolescent populations; the available evidence suggests that 2.5 mg caffeine/kg body weight/day remains an appropriate recommendation. The results of this systematic review support a shift in caffeine research to focus on characterizing effects in sensitive populations and establishing better quantitative characterization of interindividual variability (e.g., epigenetic trends), subpopulations (e.g., unhealthy populations, individuals with preexisting conditions), conditions (e.g., coexposures), and outcomes (e.g., exacerbation of risk-taking behavior) that could render individuals to be at greater risk relative to healthy adults and healthy pregnant women. This review, being one of the first to apply systematic review methodologies to toxicological assessments, also highlights the need for refined guidance and frameworks unique to the conduct of systematic review in this field. [Display omitted] •Conducted systematic review of the potential adverse effects of caffeine consumption in healthy populations.•Included evaluation of cardiovascular, behavioral, reproductive & developmental, bone & calcium, and acute effects.•Evidence supported consumption of ≤400 mg/day in adults is not associated with overt, adverse effects.•Intakes of ≤300 mg/day in pregnant women and ≤2.5 mg/kg-day in children and adolescents remain acceptable.•Findings support shift in future research to unhealthy populations, sensitive populations and interindividual variability