Systematic Review: Audiovisual Interventions for Reducing Preoperative Anxiety in Children Undergoing Elective Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of Audiovisual (AV) interventions at reducing preoperative anxiety and its associated outcomes in children undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies where the primary outcome was children's preoperative anxiety was conducted. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain, behavioral changes, recovery, induction compliance, satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness. The risk of bias of each study was assessed. RESULTS: In all, 18 studies were identified. A meta-analytic approach and narrative synthesis of findings were used to summarize the results of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that AV interventions can be effective in reducing children's preoperative anxiety. Videos, multi-faceted programs, and interactive games appear to be most effective, whereas music therapy and Internet programs are less effective. While AV interventions appear potentially useful, adequately powered RCTs are required to conclusively pinpoint the components and mechanisms of the most effective AV interventions and guide practice.
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 | 0.004 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".