Surgeons’ aims and pain assessment strategies when managing paediatric post-operative pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children experience moderate to severe pain post-operatively. Nurses have been found to have a variety of aims in this context. Surgeons' aims when managing post-operative pain have not been explored. This qualitative study set out to explore paediatric surgeons' aims when managing post-operative pain in one paediatric hospital in Canada. Consultant surgeons (n = 8) across various specialities took part in semi-structured interviews. Surgeons' overarching aim was to keep the child comfortable. Various definitions of comfortable were given, relating to the child's experience of pain itself and their ability to undertake activities of daily living. Children's behavioural pain cues seem to be a primary consideration when making treatment decisions. Parents' views regarding their child's pain were also seen as important, suggesting children may not be seen as competent to make decisions on their own behalf. The need to maintain a realistic approach was emphasised and pain management described as a balancing act. Surgeons may draw on both tacit and explicit knowledge when assessing children's pain. There appears to be an expectation among surgeons that some pain is to be expected post-operatively and that the diagnostic value of pain may, in some cases, supersede concerns for the child's pain experience.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".