The effectiveness of preoperative individual information on reducing anxiety and pain after hysterectomy: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objective: Preoperative anxiety among gynecological patients is well-known and has a direct correlation with postoperative pain. By minimizing preoperative anxiety, the level of postoperative pain may decrease. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of preoperative structured information and dialogue on patients' anxiety and postoperative pain.Methods: A single-center non-blinded randomized controlled trial. Forty-six women scheduled for hysterectomy were allocated either to the study group or the control group. The study group was given individual information at a preoperative consultation while the control group was given information at admittance. The main outcome was anxiety level and postoperative pain.Results: Forty participants (study group = 20; control group = 20) were analyzed. No statistically significant difference was found in anxiety level within the first 24 h postoperatively or in postoperative pain within four weeks between the groups.Conclusions: Preoperative individual information and dialogue did not result in significant effects in reducing anxiety level nor did it result in lower postoperative pain score.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".