Be sweet to toddlers during needles: pilot randomized controlled trial of sucrose compared to placebo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sweet solutions reduce procedural pain in infants but there is uncertainty about effectiveness beyond infancy. A blinded pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to inform a full-scale RCT. Hospitalized children aged 12- 36 months were randomized to 24% sucrose or water prior to and during venipuncture. Primary outcomes were crying time and FLACC (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) scores. Secondary outcomes parental report of child’s pain, parental perception of effectiveness and nurse’s score of child’s compliance with study solution. Twenty-one children were studied. There were no differences in pain outcomes between groups. Median FLACC scores at time of needle insertion were high (8/10), and mean crying time during procedure was 61%. Most parents (n=17) would use the same treatment next time and most (n=17) toddlers were compliant with receiving the solutions. The pilot RCT informed the conduct of a future full scale RCT in terms of feasibility, acceptability, data collection, data analysis and sample size estimation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".