The effect of auriculotherapy on the severity and duration of labor pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Pain is a common phenomenon and an inevitable part of the labor process. Labor pain is one of the most severe pains. Auriculotherapy is one of the nonpharmacological aspects of relieving pain, reduces the intensity of pain, and improves its compatibility. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of auriculotherapy on labor pain in primiparous women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This clinical trial was performed on 84 pregnant women aged between 18 and 35 years, who referred to Isfahan Shahid Beheshti Hospital in 2017. This study was carried out between two groups: control group (receiving routine hospital care) and interventional group (20 min for auriculotherapy). We used the McGill Short-Form Standard questionnaire with Visual Analog Scale. Data were analyzed by SPSS software using paired t-test and ANOVA. RESULTS: The results showed that there was no significant difference between demographic variables in the two groups. Statistical analysis also showed that the severity of labor pain in the interventional group (auriculotherapy) was lower than that of the control group (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Auriculotherapy reduces the severity of labor pain in primiparous women. Due to the easy, inexpensive, and noninvasive nature of this method, its use has been recommended in these cases.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| 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".