MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218854551 · doi:10.1155/2013/956549

A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses of Nonsucrose Sweet Solutions for Pain Relief in Neonates

2013· review· en· W2218854551 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Research and Management · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of OttawaHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsVenipunctureMedicineCryingMeta-analysisHeelRandomized controlled trialSystematic reviewCochrane LibraryAnesthesiaAnalgesicMEDLINEPediatricsSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sucrose has been demonstrated to provide analgesia for minor painful procedures in infants. However, results of trials investigating other sweet solutions for neonatal pain relief have not yet been synthesized. OBJECTIVE: To establish the efficacy of nonsucrose sweet-tasting solutions for pain relief during painful procedures in neonates. METHOD: The present article is a systematic review and meta-analyses of the literature. Standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Collaborative Review Group were used. Literature searches were reviewed for randomized controlled trials investigating the use of sweet solutions, except sucrose, for procedural pain management in neonates. Outcomes assessed included validated pain measures and behavioural and physiological indicators. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies (3785 neonates) were included, 35 of which investigated glucose. Heel lancing was performed in 21⁄38 studies and venipuncture in 11⁄38 studies. A 3.6-point reduction in Premature Infant Pain Profile scores during heel lances was observed in studies comparing 20% to 30% glucose with no intervention (two studies, 124 neonates; mean difference -3.6 [95% CI -4.6 to -2.6]; P<0.001; I2=54%). A significant reduction in the incidence of cry after venipuncture for infants receiving 25% to 30% glucose versus water or no intervention was observed (three studies, 130 infants; risk difference -0.18 [95% CI -0.31 to -0.05]; P=0.008, number needed to treat = 6 [95% CI 3 to 20]; I2=63%). CONCLUSIONS: The present systematic review and meta-analyses demonstrate that glucose reduces pain scores and crying during single heel lances and venipunctures. Results indicate that 20% to 30% glucose solutions have analgesic effects and can be recommended as an alternative to sucrose for procedural pain reduction in healthy term and preterm neonates.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.272
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it