Gum chewing and bowel function after Caesarean section under spinal anesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of gum chewing on bowel function postoperatively in women after cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. METHODS: This semi-experimental study was conducted at Near East University Hospital Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic in Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus with 45 women in both the +experimental and control groups, between October 2016 and June 2017. The women in the experimental group chewed gum two hours after surgery until gut sounds were heard and nutrition was given orally. RESULTS: The mean age of the women was 30.20 ± 4.88 in the experimental group and 30.85 ± 4.47 in the control group. In the control group, the mean time of flatulation was 26.33 ± 7.54 hours, whereas the mean time was 13.44 ± 6.56 hours in the experimental group. The mean duration to the hearing of intestinal sounds was 16.35 ± 5.20 hours in the control group and 12.62 ± 7.73 hours in the experimental group. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study indicate that sugar free gum chewing in the post-operative period which is cesarean section under spinal anesthesia shortened the duration of the intestinal movement, the time of first flatulation, and discharge time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".