Investigate the Utilization of Natural Measures on relieving Post Cesarean Incision Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post cesarean section pain is a significant problem so this study aimed to investigate the utilization of natural measures on relieving post cesarean incision pain. The study design is an intervention study design. The study sample involved 150 mother divided into 75 mother as control group who received post cesarean section hospital routine analgesics for pain relief and 75 as intervention group who received foot and hand massage for 20 minutes. They were randomly selected from Ain Shams Maternity University hospital. Tools used for data collection were a structured interviewing questionnaire sheet, a numerical rating scale and short form McGill pain questionnaire. The results showed that, a statistically significant difference in mean of pain level among study groups at 6, 12, 18 hours after delivery, (p□0.00). Also there was a statistical significant difference between mean of pain score before and after massage immediately and one hour after massage. In the light of these results the study supports the effectiveness of foot and hand massage on relieving post cesarean section pain. So this study recommended that the intervention used in this study to be a booklet or brochure about pain management post cesarean section and distributed among maternity health services in Ministry of health Egypt.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".