MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016662572 · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2010.10.008

Pain in neonates is different

2011· review· en· W2016662572 on OpenAlexaff
Céleste Johnston, Ananda Fernandes, Marsha Campbell‐Yeo

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineIntensive care medicinePain managementIntensive careAnesthesiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pain processing and management in neonates, especially preterm neonates, differs from older populations. In this review, a brief background on pain processing in neonatal life, pain exposure in Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICU), the consequences of untreated pain, and the difficulties in treating procedural pain pharmacologically will be presented. A more detailed review of non-pharmacological interventions for procedural pain in neonates will include sensory stimulation approaches, oral sweet solutions, and maternal interventions. Some possible mechanisms for the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions are offered. Finally, avenues of research into similar interventions as adjuvant therapies or drug-sparing effects in older populations are suggested.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations125
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePainSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207