MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036539257 · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2013.03.036

Naturalistic parental pain management during immunizations during the first year of life: Observational norms from the OUCH cohort

2013· article· en· W2036539257 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInfant Health and Development
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoYork University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsObservational studyCohortMedicineCohort studyNaturalismPain managementNaturalistic observationPhysical therapyPsychologySocial psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No research to date has descriptively catalogued what parents of healthy infants are naturalistically doing to manage their infant's pain over immunization appointments during the first year of life. This knowledge, in conjunction with an understanding of the relationships different parental techniques have with infant pain-related distress, would be useful when attempting to target parental pain management strategies in the infant immunization context. This study presents descriptive information about the pain management techniques parents have chosen and examines the relationships these naturalistic techniques have with infant pain-related distress during the first year of life. A total of 760 parent-infant dyads were recruited from 3 pediatric clinics in Toronto, ON, Canada, and were naturalistically followed and videotaped longitudinally over 4 immunization appointments during the infant's first year of life. Infants were full-term, healthy babies. Videotapes were subsequently coded for infant pain-related distress behaviors and parental pain management techniques. After controlling for preceding infant pain-related distress levels, parent pain management techniques accounted for, at most, 13% of the variance in infant pain-related distress scores. Across all age groups, physical comfort, rocking, and verbal reassurance were the most commonly used nonpharmacological pain management techniques. Pacifying and distraction appeared to be most promising in reducing needle-related distress in our sample of healthy infants. Parents in this sample seldom used pharmacological pain management techniques. Given the psychological and physical repercussions involved with unmanaged repetitive acute pain and the paucity of work in healthy infants, this paper highlights key areas for improving parental pain management in primary care.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.276 · 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