Magnetic Non-invasive Auricular Acupuncture During Eye-Exam for Retinopathy of Prematurity in Preterm Infants: A Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Eye exam for Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a painful procedure and pharmacological analgesia might be ineffective. We hypothesized that magnetic auricular acupuncture (MAA) compared to placebo will decrease pain during ROP exam in preterm infants. Methods: Multicentre randomized controlled trial conducted in three hospitals (Australia, Canada, and Malaysia). Eligibility: >32 weeks, ROP exam, not sedated, and parental consent. A total of 100 infants were randomized (1:1) to MAA ( n = 50) or placebo ( n = 50). MAA stickers or placebo were placed on both ears by an unblinded investigator. Pain was assessed using the Premature Infant Pain Profile. Primary analyses were by intention-to-treat. ClinicalTrials.gov :NCT03650621. Findings: The mean (standard deviation, SD) gestation, birthweight, and postnatal age were (MAA 28(3) vs. placebo 28(2) weeks; MAA 1,057(455) vs. placebo 952(273) g; MAA 7(3) vs. placebo 7(3) weeks. Placebo infants had significantly higher PIPP scores during [mean difference 1.6 points (95%CI 0.1–3.1)] and 1 h mean difference 1.5 points (95%CI 0.7–2.2) after the procedure ( p < 0.03). Heart rate was lower (173(22) vs. 184(18)/min) and oxygen saturations were higher (93.8(6.2) vs. 91.7(6.1)%, p = 0.05) in MAA infants. No adverse effects. Interpretation: MAA may reduce physiological pain responses during and after ROP exam in preterm infants. Assessment of long-term effects are warranted. Clinical trial registration : www.ClinicalTrials.gov , identifier: NCT03650621.
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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".