MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063331374 · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(00)00466-8

Prevalence and characteristics of post coronary artery bypass graft surgery pain (PCP)

2001· article· en· W2063331374 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elon Eisenberg, Yuval Pultorak, Dorit Pud, Yaron Bar-El

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMcGill Pain QuestionnaireBeck Depression InventoryChest painDepression (economics)Visual analogue scalePhysical therapyComplicationSurgeryAnesthesiaAnxietyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide. However, its frequent complication, the post-CABG pain (PCP) syndrome, remains poorly documented. This retrospective cohort study was aimed to investigate the prevalence and characteristics of this syndrome. Five hundred and four of 540 subjects, who underwent CABG surgery at our institution between January 1995 and December 1996 and who could be identified, were mailed questionnaires regarding the presence and characteristics of chest wall pain. Eighty of 217 patients, who were defined as having PCP based on these questionnaires, were evaluated in detail. Main outcome measures included a preliminary pain questionnaire, pain localization on a body scheme, a five-point verbal scale and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for measuring pain intensity. Pain qualities, disability and depression were measured by the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), the Pain Disability Index (PDI), and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), respectively. Medical and neurological examinations were also conducted, as well as quantitative thermal testing (QTT) of the chest wall. The preliminary pain questionnaires indicated that 219 of the 387 respondents (56%) reported chest wall pain, which was categorized as PCP. One hundred and forty-two (65%) of the patients with PCP reported pain of at least moderate severity, and 151 (72%) reported that the pain interfered with their daily activities. Eighty PCP patients were available for a detailed evaluation. Left-sided chest wall pain was noted by 53 subjects, midline scar pain by 47, and right-sided pain by nine subjects. Pain intensity (VAS) was 35 +/- 22 (mean +/- SD), MPQ score was 4.9 +/- 3.7, PDI score was 2.0 +/- 0.7, and BDI score was 9.3 +/- 7.3. The neurological examination and the QTT indicated three subcategories of PCP: (1) left-sided chest wall pain often associated with hypoesthesia, mechanical allodynia, and elevated thermal thresholds; (2) midline scar pain accompanied primarily by mechanical allodynia; (3) right-sided, relatively infrequent pain. While the first two subcategories seem to have a neurogenic etiology, this later subcategory of pain is of a mal-defined etiology. This study indicates that PCP is a group of pain syndromes with a high prevalence, and with a negative effect on mood and performance of daily activities. The risk of developing PCP and its potential consequences should therefore be discussed with every patient prior to CABG surgery. These results will need to be confirmed in larger, multi-center studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations152
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePainSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207