MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of warming adult diphtheria–tetanus vaccine on discomfort after injection: a randomised controlled trial

2003· article· en· W182733148 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Medical Journal of Australia · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntramuscular injections and effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiphtheriaTetanusMedicineRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaVaccinationInternal medicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether warming or rubbing adult diphtheria tetanus (ADT) vaccine immediately before administration affects its temperature and reduces the incidence of pain. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomised controlled trial and in-vitro temperature study. SETTING: Emergency department (ED) of a regional hospital between April and December 2001. PATIENTS: Convenience sample of 150 patients aged 16 years or over who presented to the ED requiring ADT booster vaccination. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomised to receive vaccine that was "cold" (no deliberate warming), "rubbed" between the palms for 1 minute, or "warmed" in a 37 degrees C incubator; vaccine was administered as recommended in Australian guidelines. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of pain and pain score on McGill Present Pain Intensity Questionnaire at 5 minutes, 24 hours and 48 hours after injection; and temperature of vaccine after preparation for simulated administration. RESULTS: The "cold" vaccine had significantly lower temperature (mean, 19.1 degrees C; 95% CI, 17.5-20.7 degrees C) than the "warmed" vaccine (mean, 28.9 degrees C; 95% CI, 28.4-29.4 degrees C) and "rubbed" vaccine (mean, 26.9 degrees C; 95% CI, 24.5-29.3 degrees C). There was no significant difference in incidence of pain between the groups who received vaccine prepared in different ways at any follow-up (5 min: P = 0.62; 24 h: P = 0.58; 48 h: P = 0.61) or overall (P = 0.99). Among those who completed follow-up, incidence of pain at any time was 77/138 (56%); there was no difference in their time-averaged pain scores (P = 0.63) or peak pain scores (P = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: Warming or rubbing ADT vaccine does not reduce the incidence of pain after administration. Regardless of how ADT vaccine is prepared, its temperature approaches ambient by the time it is injected.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it