MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104265022 · doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1107

Pain Reduction During Pediatric Immunizations: Evidence-Based Review and Recommendations

2007· review· en· W2104265022 on OpenAlexaff
Neil L. Schechter, William T. Zempsky, Lindsey L. Cohen, Patrick J. McGrath, C. Meghan McMurtry, Nancy S. Bright

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntramuscular injections and effects
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersMAYDAY FundRockefeller Foundation
KeywordsMedicineDistractionCryingDistressAnxietyPacifierRandomized controlled trialPediatricsPhysical therapyBreastfeedingPsychiatrySurgeryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pain associated with immunizations is a source of anxiety and distress for the children receiving the immunizations, their parents, and the providers who must administer them. Preparation of the child before the procedure seems to reduce anxiety and subsequent pain. The limited available data suggest that intramuscular administration of immunizations should occur in the vastus lateralis (anterolateral thigh) for children <18 months of age and in the deltoid (upper arm) for those >36 months of age. Controversy exists in site selection for 18- to 36-month-old children. A number of studies suggest that the ventrogluteal area is the most appropriate for all age groups. Longer needles are usually associated with less pain and less local reaction. During the injection, parental demeanor clearly affects the child's pain behaviors. Excessive parental reassurance, criticism, or apology seems to increase distress, whereas humor and distraction tend to decrease distress. Distraction techniques vary with the age, temperament, and interests of the child, but their efficacy is well supported in the literature. Sucrose solution instilled directly into the mouth or administered on a pacifier reduces evidence of distress reliably in children <6 months of age and should be used routinely. Although there is no perfect topical anesthetic available at this time, selective use for children who are particularly fearful or who have had negative experiences in the past is highly endorsed. Pressure at the site, applied with either a device or a finger, clearly reduces pain. Finally, in the era of multiple injections, it seems that parents prefer that multiple injections be given simultaneously, rather than sequentially, if there are enough personnel available. Immunizations are stressful for many children; until new approaches are developed, systematic use of available techniques can significantly reduce the burden of distress associated with these procedures.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations333
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicIntramuscular injections and effectsFrench-language works237,207