Evaluating Injury Prevention Initiatives - CONVENTIONS USED HERE
CONVENTIONS USED HERE
As a resource to those involved in the injury surveillance and prevention
field, we have used both conventional Harvard (Authors, date) citation of
references, as well as electronic internet and World Wide Web (URL) addresses,
wherever possible.
Australian Sources
As this review has been conducted by Australians, we have been able to access
both the international and the Australian literature. Unfortunately the latter
does not often reach overseas readers. Consequently we have indulged in an
intended bias to use Australian sources where ever possible.
The classifications schemes used might have been based on the Australian
Human Services Thesaurus (Department of Human Services and Health,
1995); and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 1996) Research
Classification Schemes. However, unfortunately, they were found
inadequate for the purpose. It is clear that there are some gaps[1] and inconsistencies[2] in
these research codes as far as the foci of this bibliography are concerned. The
only advantage in adopting such a standard research classification scheme would
have been the comparability with the ABS and OECD databases. However, this did
not warrant the effort in making the various models and types of evaluation and
injury prevention fit into such a small undiscriminating set of categories.
Again the ABS classification scheme highlights the difficulties in data
collection processes in the field of injury prevention.
[1] For example, injury prevention
and evaluation methodologies are not listed as categories
[2] Compare the classification of
"environmental health" as a Public health research field (100801)
along with "environmental and occupational health and safety" and in
terms of a Division 3 Public Health Socio-economic objective
classification as 130207 Environmental health and under Division
4 "Social Environment" (code 160604).
|