Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify the effects of EMLA cream (eutectic mixture of local anesthetics, lidocaine and prilocaine) on pain during ampicillin sodium intradermal (ID) skin test, and also to assess skin reaction after the skin test. Methods: Forty-three nurse-volunteers had skin tests with 0.01ml-0.05ml ampicillin sodium antibiotics. Skin tests were done on each forearm to compare the pain level of the skin test site after application of EMLA cream with the pain level when no EMLA cream was applied. EMLA cream was applied at the ID skin test site with an occlusive dressing for one hour. Pain was evaluated using a visual analogue scale and pain sensation using the short form McGill Pain Questionnaire. The transverse diameter of the wheal and redness was read right after and at 15 minutes after the skin test. The results were compared using independent t-tests. Results: Pain score and sensation with EMLA cream treatment were significantly lower than when EMLA cream was not applied. There was no difference in skin reactions; reading of the skin test was not affected by EMLA cream. Conclusions: EMLA cream was found to be an effective local anesthetic to relieve the pain of clients having ampicillin sodium antibiotics ID skin tests.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".