Effectiveness of a parent‐targeted video on neonatal pain management: Nonrandomized pragmatic trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The “Be sweet to babies” video is a knowledge translation tool targeted at parents on the use of analgesic strategies during painful procedures performed in neonates. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Portuguese version of this video on maternal involvement in neonatal pain management during the newborn screening blood test. Nonrandomized, pragmatic clinical trial. The study was conducted in a rooming‐in unit. All mothers received a pamphlet regarding neonatal pain management and were invited to participate in daily education sessions conducted by nurses, which included the video. The intervention group included mothers who voluntarily watched the video, while the control group was comprised of mothers who did not attend the education sessions or left the session before watching the video. Data were collected by interviews conducted by the research team. Descriptive and inferential analysis considered a confidence interval of 95%. A total of 73 mothers were included in the study. Analgesic strategies were used in 14 (40%) of the procedures in the intervention group and 9 (24%) in the control group, a clinically important difference of 16% points between groups, although no statistically significant difference was found ( P = .13). Breastfeeding was the most commonly used strategy. Watching the video increased the chance of implementing analgesic strategies by 2.1 times ( P = .19), while nurses suggesting the use of analgesia increased this chance by 5.5 times ( P = .006). Although no statistical significance was found, the results suggest the clinical significance and feasibility of the “Be sweet to babies” video as a KT tool targeted at parents on neonatal pain management during nonurgent painful procedures. In addition, maternal involvement in pain care significantly increased when pain relief strategies were recommended by nurses, which suggests that nurses have a key role in facilitating parental participation.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".