MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168174778 · doi:10.1002/ejp.1816

The validity of skin conductance for assessing acute pain in mechanically ventilated infants: A cross‐sectional observational study

2021· article· en· W3168174778 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiale Hu, JoAnn Harrold, Janet E. Squires, Shokoufeh Modanloo, Denise Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pain · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Pain SocietyCHEO Research InstituteSigma Theta Tau InternationalOttawa Hospital Research InstituteUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeObservational studyPain assessmentCross-sectional studyIntensive careAnesthesiaSkin conductancePediatricsSurgeryPain managementInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Assessing pain in mechanically ventilated infants is challenging. The assessment of skin conductance (SC) is based on the sympathetic nervous system response to stress. This study purpose was to evaluate the validity of SC for assessing pain in mechanically ventilated infants. METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional observational design was used to study SC and its relation to: the category of procedure (i.e., painful or non-painful); the phase of procedure (i.e., before, during and after), and referent pain measurements (i.e., Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) and Neonatal Facial Coding System (NFCS)). Eligible infants were those up to 12 months of age, in intensive care units, who were mechanically ventilated, and required painful and non-painful procedures. RESULTS: From October 2017 to November 2018, 130 eligible infants were identified, and 55 infants were studied. SC (number of waves per second) during painful procedures (median 0.27, interquartile range 0.2-0.4) was statistically significantly higher than those during non-painful procedures (0, 0-0.09). SC during painful procedures was statistically significantly higher than those before (0, 0-0.07) and after painful procedures (0, 0-0.07). SC showed moderate statistically significant positive correlations with PIPP-R (Spearman's rho = 0.4-0.62) and the four-item NFCS (Spearman's rho = 0.31-0.67) before, during and after painful or non-painful procedures respectively. SC had excellent performance (area under the receiver operator curve = 0.979) with excellent sensitivity (92.31%), specificity (95.42%) and negative predictive value (99.21%) but only sufficient positive predictive value (66.67%) when used to discriminate moderate-to-severe pain. CONCLUSIONS: SC showed good validity for assessing pain in critically ill infants requiring mechanical ventilation. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY: Pain assessment in mechanically ventilated infants is challenging. In this study, the validity of skin conductance (SC) for pain assessment is evaluated in the same population of infants during painful and nonpainful procedures. SC showed good validity for assessing acute pain in relation to category of procedure, phase of procedure, and referent pain measurements. SC is a promising method, especially with other pain assessment methods and other determinants of pain, in a multimodal pain assessment approach to understand the complexity of pain in mechanically ventilated infants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of PainSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207