Pain management during eye examinations for retinopathy of prematurity in preterm infants: a systematic review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To assess whether non-pharmacological and/or pharmacological measures lead to decreased pain during an eye examination in preterm infants. METHODS: . DESIGN: Systematic review. SUBJECTS: Premature infants meeting the criteria for screening eye examination for retinopathy. INTERVENTION: Databases were searched through the Ovid interface. Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials were included. Data were assessed independently by three reviewers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain assessed by Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) or physiological changes. RESULTS: Eight studies were included and grouped according to intervention: oral sucrose (group 1), anaesthetic eye drops (group 2) and non-pharmacological measures (group 3). For group 1, the mean PIPP score with sucrose was 1.38 (WMD) (95% CI: 0.41-2.35) lower than that of placebo (p = 0.005). For group 2, one study showed a reduction of two points on the PIPP score with topical proparacaine, whereas another showed no benefit. For group 3, developmental care improved developmental scores and salivary cortisol in one study. CONCLUSION: Sucrose reduced pain during the eye examination, whereas the efficacy of proparacaine was not consistent in the studies included. However, PIPP scores remained relatively high in all the studies; thus further research is required to delineate better pain reduction strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it