Evaluation of pain before and after vaginal delivery.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this pilot study was to determine pain characteristics of pregnant women immediately before and after childbirth by vaginal delivery and to compare them with the pain intensity reported by physicians. METHODS: We evaluated 20 Brazilian women between September and December 2007 with the WHOQOL-Bref instrument, VAS, McGill Pain Questionnaire, and Anxiety Adapted Scale. We interviewed the obstetrician with the VAS about the patient's pain. Data were analyzed with the chi-square test. RESULTS: Mean age was 22.35 years (SD = 6.24, range 15-39 years). It was necessary to use oxytocin in 15 (75%) patients, which had no correlation with anxiety degree. Higher intensity of pain (p < 0.05) and higher anxiety index (p < 0.05) were more common in women in the first pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Higher pain intensity was associated with higher anxiety levels (p < 0.05). Around half of the obstetricians' VAS scores were lower than the VAS scores of women, and probably pain at labor was underestimated and not controlled. Higher indices of anxiety and pain were associated, and were more frequent in women in the first pregnancy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".