The effect of an educational intervention based on Ottawa Guideline on nausea and vomiting at first trimester of pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective (s): Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy is a list of the most common pregnancy problem. The combination of non-drug treatments involves nutrition, lifestyle changes, and alternative medicine to treat nausea and vomiting of pregnancy is paid less attention as a published guidelines. The aim of this research was to determine the effect of an educational intervention based on Ottawa Guideline in nausea and vomiting at first trimester of pregnancy. Methods: This single-blind clinical trial was conducted on 60 pregnant women with nausea and vomiting complication from a selected primary healthcare centers in Mashahd (Iran). The participants were randomly assigned to two groups, an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group received the Ottawa training guide (two sessions: general, attention, nutrition, lifestyle, alternative medicine, and acupressure) during two 60-minute sessions and the control group received the usual care. Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DOS-21(, the Rhodes index of nausea and vomiting, and Czech playlists training manual Ottawa were used. The Chi-square tests, Fisher Mann-Whitney U, independent and paired t-test were used for analysis. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of nausea (p= 0.002), vomiting (P = 0.007), and retching (P = 0.009) on the fourth weeks after the initial intervention. (p =<0.001). The mean of total score of nausea, vomiting and gagging in the second and fourth weeks in the experimental group were significantly lower than the control group (p <0.001). Conclusion: The Czech playlists training manual Ottawa can be effective in reducing nausea, vomiting in pregnant women.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".