The effects of skin‐to‐skin contact during acute pain in preterm newborns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Several promising non-pharmacological interventions have been developed to reduce acute pain in preterm infants including skin-to-skin contact between a mother and her infant. However, variability in physiological outcomes of existing studies on skin-to-skin makes it difficult to determine treatment effects of this naturalistic approach for the preterm infant. The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of mother and infant skin-to-skin contact during heel prick in premature infants. METHOD: Fifty nine stable preterm infants (born at least 30 weeks gestational age) who were undergoing routine heel lance were randomly assigned to either 15 min of skin-to-skin contact before, during and following heel prick (n=31, treatment group), or to regular care (n=28, control group). Throughout the heel lance procedure, all infants were assessed for change in facial action (NFCS), behavioral state, crying, and heart rate. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were noted between the treatment and control groups during the puncture, heel squeeze and the post phases of heel prick. Infants who received skin-to-skin contact were more likely to show lower NFCS scores throughout the procedure. Both groups of infants cried and showed increased heart rate during puncture and heel squeeze although changes in these measures were less for the treated infants. CONCLUSIONS: Skin-to-skin contact promoted reduction in behavioral measures and less physiological increase during procedure. It is recommended that skin-to-skin contact be used as a non-pharmacologic intervention to relieve acute pain in stable premature infants born 30 weeks gestational age or older.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".