MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055867742 · doi:10.1097/ajp.0b013e3181fe14cf

Pain in Canadian NICUs

2010· article· en· W2055867742 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

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineChecklistObservational studyIncidence (geometry)Neonatal intensive care unitIntensive care unitAnalgesicIntensive carePsychological interventionProspective cohort studyEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaSurgeryPediatricsInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of and factors predicting management strategies used for procedural pain in Canadian neonatal intensive care units and to determine whether the incidence of procedures and their management has changed since our 1997 study. PATIENTS: Five hundred eighty-two neonates who were hospitalized in any of the participating study centers were included. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in 14 Canadian neonatal intensive care units (level III A and III B). Infants were followed for 1 week regarding all invasive procedures. Data were collected prospectively by unit staff using a checklist and verified by research assistants. RESULTS: A total of 3508 tissue damaging (mean=5.8, SD=15) and 14,085 (mean=25.6, SD=15) nontissue damaging procedures were recorded. Half of procedures (46% tissue damaging and 57% nontissue damaging) had no analgesic interventions. Opiates were used for 14.5% of tissue-damaging procedures and sweet taste was used for 14.3% of the tissue-damaging procedures. Factors predicting use of pharmacologic management of tissue-damaging procedures were being less ill at birth, receiving high frequency ventilatory support, and being transferred to the study center. Parental presence predicted use of sweet taste or nonpharmacologic analgesia for tissue-damaging procedures. Study site practices varied widely with 1 unit providing analgesia for 90% of tissue-damaging procedures. INTERPRETATION: Although the number of tissue-damaging procedures has decreased from 1997 and the use of analgesics has increased, the management of these procedures falls far below the recommended guidelines of the Canadian Pediatric Society. That 1 unit reached a high level of analgesic use suggests that it is possible to achieve this goal. That parental presence had a positive influence on comfort strategies supports offering encouragement and support for parents to remain with their infant during procedures.

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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.019
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.344 · 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