The impact of skin prick testing on pain perception and anxiety in children and parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Skin prick testing (SPT) is a major diagnostic tool in patients with allergic symptoms. The testing process may involve pain, anxiety, and stress on children and parents. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to measure the level of pain and anxiety before and after SPT in children and parents, and tried to identify predictive factors. METHODS: The children underwent SPT and parents completed the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) S-Anxiety before and after SPT, T-Anxiety before SPT. The study nurse completed Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS) scores (<5 years) or Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (VAS), (≥5 years) after the SPT, in order to quantify pain. RESULTS: A total of 523 children (5.3 [2.8-9.1] [median, interquartile range] years old, 59.5% male) were evaluated. Parent gender was a predominant factor for anxiety, as mothers had a higher pre-test STAI (S-Anxiety) score, STAI (T-Anxiety), and post-test STAI (S-Anxiety) score than fathers (p < 0.001). Pre-test STAI (S-Anxiety) scores of parents decreased with increasing age (for 0-<5 years, 5-<12 years, and ≥12 years; [p for trend = 0.016]). The children tested on the back had higher VAS scores compared with the ones tested on the forearm [2[0-4] vs 2[0-2], [p = 0.005]). Risk factors determining higher general anxiety STAI (T-Anxiety) scores above the median were female sex for the parent (OR = 1.68; 95% CI [1.10-2.57]; p = 0.017), and parent's education level being greater than or equal to high school level (OR = 1.83; 95% CI [1.27-2.64]; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: SPT may cause anxiety and pain in a subgroup of children particularly in younger age, and if performed on the back. Anxiety levels were higher in mothers, and in parents with high education levels.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".