Comparison of effect of intravenous ketamine, peritonsillar infiltration of tramadol and their combination on pediatric posttonsillectomy pain: A double-blinded randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the aim was the evaluation of effect of intravenous (IV) administration of ketamine, peritonsillar infiltration of tramadol and their combination for control of post-operative pain in comparison with single use of each drug in children undergoing tonsillectomy. One hundred and twenty children, aged 2- 15 years, selected for elective adenotonsillectomy were enrolled in the study. We divided the patients into four groups of 30 each, Group I: received IV ketamine 0.5 mg/kg, Group II: received peritonsillar infiltration of tramadol 2 mg/kg, Group III: received IV ketamine 0.5 mg/kg added to peritonsillar tramadol 2 mg/kg and Group IV: received IV and peritonsillar infiltration of 0.9% saline. We utilized the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS) recorded each 15 min after surgery to the first h and then each 2 , 4, 6, 8, 16, 24 h to assess pain levels postoperatively. The analysis of data showed that Group III had significantly lower CHEOPS scores than another three groups (P<0.001), while both Groups I and II had the same ranged scores, which were not statistically significant (P>0.05). During 24 h after surgery, the first time for analgesic requirement was higher in Group III in comparison with other groups (P<0.001). Combined use of IV ketamine 0.5 mg/kg with peritonsillar infiltration of tramadol 2 mg/kg provided better and more prolong analgesic effects compared with using each drug alone in patients undergoing tonsillectomy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".