Effect of heat therapy on pain severity in primigravida women.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Labor pain relief has been considered since many years ago. Heat as a non pharmacological method of pain relief helps reducing the pain intensity and increases the pain consistency. The aim of the study was to determine the effect of the heat therapy on the labor pain in primigravida women. METHODS: In this clinical trial study, 64 low risk nulliparous women were randomly divided into two heat therapy and routine care groups. In addition to the routine cares, warm bag were used for the heat therapy group for the low back, from cervix dilatation of 3-4 cm to the end of the labor's first stage and for perinea at the second stage. The pain intensity was determined by McGill pain questionnaire in dilatation of 3-4, 6-7 and 9-10 cm and at the end of the labor's second stage. Data was analyzed using t-test and chi square test by using SPSS 11. RESULTS: Results of research showed a significant decrease in the pain intensity in the heat therapy group at the first stage and the second stage of labor and comparing two groups showed significant difference(p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this study, it seems that heat therapy in addition to its beneficial effects, causes the mother to sense the labor pain in a lower pain severity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".