This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Susan P. Baker, MPH; Kopl Halperin, PhD

JAMA. 1995;274(22):1805.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Dr Rimell and his colleagues¹ deserve accolades for their exemplary research on childhood choking, which appears in this issue of JAMA. It is valuable to have suggestions for changes in regulations based on specific data and to have evidence that long objects with round components are hazardous even when they meet current standards. A staff report to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in 1987 identified as hazardous not only round (spherical) but also teardrop-shaped objects and cones and pointed out that many objects involved in chokings were too large to fit into the test cylinder,² suggesting a need to increase the minimum size specified in the regulations. Rimell et al also found 14 objects that met current standards but caused choking deaths and suggest increasing minimal size standards. Long objects with round components could also be tested using the test fixture for rattles, which is larger in . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Center for Injury Research and Policy, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, Md.

Footnotes
Corresponding author: Susan P. Baker, MPH, Center for Injury Research and Policy, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, 624 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21205-1996.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?