Oral morphine protocol evaluation for the treatment of vaso-occlusive crisis in paediatric sickle cell patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC) is one of the most frequent causes of emergency visit and admission in children with sickle cell disease (SCD). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate whether the implementation of a protocol promoting the use of oral morphine as a primary intervention has led to improved care of SCD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with SCD who presented to the emergency department (ED) and hematology outpatient clinic (HOC) with VOC, in the year pre and postimplementation of the protocol. The primary outcome was the hospitalization rate. RESULTS: The protocol resulted in a significant 43% reduction of hospitalization rate (95% confidence interval [CI] -53.0, 26.5). Results also showed a 35% increase in the use of oral morphine as first-line opiate treatment (95% CI 17.9, 45.2), a 28% increase in the use of pain scales (95% CI 17.3, 43.2) and a 30% net increase in patients eventually not requiring intravenous (IV) line placement (95% CI 16.0, 39.9). While we did observe an overall decrease in length of stay in ED of -55 min (95% CI -100.6, -12.0), there was a nonsignificant decrease of 7 minutes (95% CI -26, 3) in the opiate administration time. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the use of our oral morphine protocol for the treatment of VOC by significantly reducing the admission rate and decreasing the number of IVs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".