A randomised, controlled study of peri‐operative low dose s(+)‐ketamine in combination with postoperative patient‐controlled s(+)‐ketamine and morphine after radical prostatectomy*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a randomised, double-blind prospective study we compared the effects on postoperative pain and analgesic consumption of intra-operative s(+)-ketamine (100 microg.kg-1 bolus and a continuous infusion of 2 microg.kg-1.min-1) followed by postoperative patient-controlled analgesia with morphine (1 mg per bolus) plus s(+)-ketamine (0.5 mg per bolus), or intra-operative saline followed by postoperative patient-controlled analgesia morphine (1 mg per bolus) alone. A total of 28 male patients undergoing radical prostatectomy were studied. Morphine consumption, pain scores, pressure algometry and adverse effects were recorded for 48 h after surgery. Cumulative morphine consumption was significantly lower in the ketamine/morphine group (47.9 +/- 26.2 mg) than in the saline/morphine group (73.4 +/- 34.8 mg; p = 0.049). Pain scores at rest were significantly lower in the ketamine/morphine group across the 48-h study period (p = 0.01). No significant differences were found in pressure algometry measurements or the occurrence of adverse effects.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".