MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080256206 · doi:10.1097/jcn.0b013e3181cd66be

Pain Experiences of Men and Women After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

2010· article· en· W2080256206 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Monica Parry, Judy Watt‐Watson, Ellen Hodnett, Joan Tranmer, Cindy‐Lee Dennis, Dina Brooks

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Lawrence CollegeKingston General HospitalToronto Public Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineArteryCoronary artery bypass surgeryQuality of life (healthcare)Coronary artery diseasePhysical therapyPostoperative painInternal medicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Background and Research Ojectives: Individuals with coronary artery disease undergo coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery to relieve symptoms, improve quality of life, and reduce early death. Pain is the most prevalent symptom identified by persons after CABG surgery. The objective of the study was to compare the prevalence and severity of pain and pain-related interference with activities in men and women 9 weeks after CABG surgery. Subjects and Methods: Participants included men (n = 78) and women (n = 17) who were having first-time nonemergency CABG surgery. Pain outcome data were collected via telephone using the McGill Pain Questionnaire and the Brief Pain Inventory-Interference Subscale. Results and Conclusions: Forty-seven percent of the women (n = 8) had moderate to severe pain described as the "worst pain in previous 24 hours with movement" 9 weeks following discharge from CABG surgery. More women were divorced, widowed, or single (P = .0002). There was a statistically significant between-groups difference, with more women reporting moderate to severe pain with movement (P = .03), as well as greater interference with walking (P = .01) and sleeping (P = .01) due to pain. Further research with larger sample sizes should investigate what conditions lead to the sex differences in the pain experience after CABG surgery, what mechanisms and support structures underlie these differences, and how these differences can inform the clinical management of pain. Background and Research Ojectives: Individuals with coronary artery disease undergo coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery to relieve symptoms, improve quality of life, and reduce early death. Pain is the most prevalent symptom identified by persons after CABG surgery. The objective of the study was to compare the prevalence and severity of pain and pain-related interference with activities in men and women 9 weeks after CABG surgery. Subjects and Methods: Participants included men (n = 78) and women (n = 17) who were having first-time nonemergency CABG surgery. Pain outcome data were collected via telephone using the McGill Pain Questionnaire and the Brief Pain Inventory-Interference Subscale. Results and Conclusions: Forty-seven percent of the women (n = 8) had moderate to severe pain described as the "worst pain in previous 24 hours with movement" 9 weeks following discharge from CABG surgery. More women were divorced, widowed, or single (P = .00002). There was a statistically significant between-groups difference, with more women reporting moderate to severe pain with movement (P = .03), as well as greater interference with walking (P = .01) and sleeping (P = .01) due to pain. Further research with larger sample sizes should investigate what conditions lead to the sex differences in the pain experience after CABG surgery, what mechanisms and support structures underlie these differences, and how these differences can inform the clinical management of pain.

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)0.000
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations37
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cardiovascular NursingSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207