Non‐pharmacological interventions during childbirth for pain relief, anxiety, and neuroendocrine stress parameters: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This study aimed to investigate the effect of warm shower hydrotherapy and perineal exercises with a ball on pain, anxiety, and neuroendocrine stress parameters during childbirth. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted with 128 women during childbirth, admitted for hospital birth in São Paulo, Brazil, from June 2013 to February 2014. The participants were randomly assigned into one of the following intervention groups: received warm shower hydrotherapy (GA); performed perineal exercises with a ball (GB); and combined intervention group, which received warm shower hydrotherapy and perineal exercises with a ball (GC) (n = 39). Pre-and post-intervention parameters were evaluated using visual analogue scales for pain and anxiety, and salivary samples were collected for the stress hormones analysis. RESULTS: Pain, anxiety, and epinephrine release decreased in the group performing perineal exercises with a ball (GB). β-endorphin levels increased in this group (GB) after the intervention and showed significant difference in capacity to cause this effect (P = .007). However, no significant differences were observed in cortisol, epinephrine, and norepinephrine levels. CONCLUSIONS: Warm showers and perineal exercises could be considered as adjunct therapy for women suffering from pain, anxiety, and stress during childbirth. Clinical Trial Registry RBR-84xprt.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".