Evaluation of Pain in the Pediatric Emergency Department and the Request of Analgesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the acute pain level associated with request for analgesia by children and their parents in the pediatric emergency department (ED) when pain was assessed by verbal numeric scale (VNS), visual analog scale (VAS), and verbal rating scale (VRS). METHODS: A secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study using a sample of children aged 8 to 17 presenting to the ED with acute pain. Patients and their parents were asked to quantify the child's pain on the VNS, VAS, and VRS. Scores for patients and parents who answered "yes" to the request of analgesia were compared with those responding "no." RESULTS: A total of 202 patients aged 12.2 ± 2.6 years were enrolled. The median levels of pain associated with a request of analgesia and no request for analgesia by the patient were: 6.0 (4.0-7.4) and 5.0 (3.0-6.0) (Δ 1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-2.0) for the VNS; 5.7 (3.9-7.2) and 4.3 (2.6-5.8) (Δ 1.3; 95% CI, 0.6-1.9) for the VAS; and 2.0 (2.0-2.0) and 2.0 (1.0-2.0) (Δ 0.0; 95% CI, 0.0-0.0) for the VRS. CONCLUSIONS: Children who requested analgesia had higher pain scores on the VNS and the VAS, than those who did not request analgesia. No difference was demonstrated with the VRS. The pain scores between the analgesia request categories could overlap. This suggests that children seen in the ED should be asked if they want analgesia to decrease their acute pain.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".