Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In patients having medical abortions with methotrexate and misoprostol: (1) to determine if giving ibuprofen or acetaminophen plus codeine with misoprostol (prior to onset of pain) prevented severe pain; and (2) to determine if there were predictors of medical abortion pain. METHODS: A group of 281 women randomized to receive placebo, ibuprofen or acetaminophen with codeine. This was taken at home with the misoprostol 4-6 days after the methotrexate. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the three groups with respect to age, gestational age, parity, anxiety, depression, worst period pain score, and ethnicity. There was no significant difference with respect to rates of severe pain scores. The mean pain score for the entire group was 6.2 on a scale of 0 to 10. Severe pain (scores of 9 or 10) were reported by 23.4% of women and in this group, the mean maternal age was lower (P=0.05), parity was lower (P=0.01), worst period pain scores were higher (P=0.001), anxiety scores were higher (P=0.05) and satisfaction was lower (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The pain experienced in medical abortion causes significant distress and more research is needed to reduce it.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".