MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effectivness of cooling gel pads and ice packs on perineal pain

2009· article· en· W2000304452 on OpenAlex
Shahin Navvabi, Zahra Abedian, Mary Steen

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueBritish Journal of Midwifery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsEpisiotomyMedicineVisual analogue scaleRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaIntensity (physics)Statistical significancePatient satisfactionSurgeryPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports the findings of a randomized controlled trial undertaken at the Hazrat Ommolbanin University Maternity Hospital in Mashhad, Iran, which investigated the effectiveness of localized cooling treatments to alleviate perineal trauma. From October 2005 to February 2006, 121 primiparous women who were at term and had an episiotomy were randomly recruited to one of three treatment groups (Group 1 – no localized cooling; Group 2 – Ice pack; Group 3 – cooling gel pad). The intensity of pain, wound healing and women's satisfaction levels were the main outcomes measured. The intensity of pain was measured by a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (1–10) and wound healing was evaluated by the REEDA scale within 4 hours of episiotomy repair; at days 1, 2, 5 and 10. The use of oral analgesia was measured at day 10. Women's satisfaction levels with oral analgesia and localized cooling treatments were also assessed at day 10 by a NRS. There was evidence that localized cooling treatments are effective in alleviating perineal pain, which was in favour of the cooling gel pad group. A statistical significant difference was reported at 4 hours (P=0.003); day 2 (P=0.004); and at day 10 (P=0.044). At days 1 and 5 there was evidence of a reduction in the intensity of pain but this did not reach a statistical significant difference. A reduction in the use of oral analgesia was reported in favour of the cooling gel pad group (P<0.001). Women's satisfaction levels with oral analgesia were similar within the three treatment groups but a higher level of satisfaction when assessing localized treatment was reported by the cooling gel pad group (P‹0.001). Wound healing rates were also reported to be better in the cooling gel pad group when compared to the other two groups (P<0.001). Women's views and treatments to alleviate perineal pain without any adverse affects on wound healing are important aspects of midwifery care. This trial has demonstrated evidence that localized cooling of the perineum reduces the intensity of pain. Women were more satisfied when applying cooling gel pads and this treatment appeared to assist in wound healing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.243 · 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