Electroencephalographic Activity in Response to Procedural Pain in Preterm Infants Born at 28 and 33 Weeks Gestational Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Preterm infants undergo frequent painful procedures in the neonatal intensive care unit. Electroencephalography (EEG) changes in reaction to invasive procedures have been reported in preterm and full-term neonates. Frontal EEG asymmetry as an index of emotion during tactile stimulation shows inconsistent findings in full-term infants, and has not been examined in the context of pain in preterm infants. Our aim was to examine whether heel lance for blood collection induces changes in right-left frontal asymmetry, suggesting negative emotional response, in preterm neonates at different gestational age (GA) at birth and different duration of stay in the neonatal intensive care unit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of preterm infants were compared: set 1: group 1 (n=24), born and tested at 28 weeks GA; group 2 (n=22), born at 28 weeks GA and tested at 33 weeks; set 2: group 3 (n=25), born and tested at 33 weeks GA. EEG power was calculated for 30-second artifact-free periods, in standard frequency bandwidths, in 3 phases (baseline, up to 5 min after heel lance, 10 min after heel lance). RESULTS: No significant differences were found in right-left frontal asymmetry, or in ipsilateral or contralateral somatosensory response, across phases. In contrast, the Behavioral Indicators of Infant Pain scores changed across phase (P<0.0001). Infants in group 1 showed lower Behavioral Indicators of Infant Pain scores (P=0.039). DISCUSSION: There are technical challenges in recording EEG during procedures, as pain induces motor movements. More research is needed to determine the most sensitive approach to measure EEG signals within the context of pain in infancy.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".