Comparing the effect of entonox and pure oxygen on pain intensity of delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: During recent years, in most developed countries there have been many attempts to increase the application rate of Entonox inhalation use education and other interfering methods. In this study, the effect of Entonox and pure oxygen inhalation on pain intensity of delivery was compared. Methods: In this interventional study, 60 women with term pregnancy in Fatemeh-Zahra Hospital of Najafabad were selected based on purposive method and were randomly divided into 2 equal case and control groups. The case group inhaled Entonox and control group only inhaled pure oxygen. McGill pain questionnaire was used to measure the intensity of labor pain. Both groups were compared for labor pain and method of delivery. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square and p<0.05 was considered significant. Results: The mean of labor pain intensity was decreased significantly after using Entonox compared to the control group (p<0.001). Also, fewer patients in the case group required cesarean section compared to the control group, but the difference was not significant (p=0.52). Conclusion: Entonox inhalation reduces labor pain effectively in majority of women during labor.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".