Effects of therapeutic suggestion in children undergoing general anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES AND AIM: The goal of this randomized controlled trial was to examine the effect of intraoperative positive therapeutic suggestion on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in children undergoing general anesthesia and otolaryngological surgery. BACKGROUND: Because of the high incidence of PONV following otolaryngological surgery and its negative impact on recovery, researchers have examined various nonpharmacological interventions to target this phenomenon. To date, the effectiveness of therapeutic suggestion has not been studied in children. METHODS: Participants were 67 children undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy and their mothers. Children received a standardized anesthetic procedure and were randomly assigned to one of three interventions administered under general anesthesia: therapeutic suggestion, story (prosody control), or standard operating room noise. Children, parents, and healthcare personnel were blinded to group assignment. Nausea and vomiting were recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and for the first 3 days at home. RESULTS: Results demonstrated a decrease in nausea severity across the first 3 days, F(2,49) = 10.37, P < 0.001, but no group differences in nausea severity in the PACU (F(2,49) = 0.87, P = 0.43) or at home (F(2,49) = 0.80, P = 0.46). There were also no group differences in vomiting episodes in the PACU (chi(2) (2) = 1.25, P > 0.05) or at home (F(2,49) = 1.59, P = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: In this blinded controlled trial, therapeutic suggestion delivered intraoperatively did not impact children's PONV. However, because this is the first study of this kind, replication may be needed.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".