Be Sweet to Hospitalized Toddlers During Venipuncture: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Sucrose Compared With Water.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: High-quality evidence demonstrates analgesic effects of sweet-tasting solutions for infants during painful procedures. However, evidence of the analgesic effects of sucrose beyond 12 months of age is less certain. The aim of this study was to ascertain the efficacy of oral sucrose in hospitalized toddlers (ages 12 to 36 mo) compared with placebo (water) during venipuncture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Blinded, 2-armed randomized controlled trial including hospitalized toddlers aged 12 to 36 months. Toddlers were randomized to either 25% sucrose or water before venipuncture, stratified by age (12 to 24 mo and more than 24 to 36 mo). Standard of care included topical anesthetics for both groups. Pain assessment included cry duration and FLACC (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) scores. Descriptive statistics and linear models were used to report the percentage of time crying and mean differences in FLACC scores. Data analysis was performed using R, version 3.6.3. RESULTS: A total of 95 toddlers were randomized and 85 subsequently studied. The median percentage of time spent crying between insertion of the first needle and 30 seconds after the end of procedure in both groups was 81% (interquartile range=66%). There was no significant difference in crying time and FLACC scores between groups (P>0.05). When examining effects of sucrose for the younger toddlers (less than 24 mo of age) there was a reduction in crying time of 10% and a 1.2-point reduction in mean FLACC scores compared with the toddlers older than 24 months. DISCUSSION: Findings highlight that toddlers become highly distressed during venipuncture, despite the standard care of topical anesthetics. In addition, sucrose does not effectively reduce distress especially in the older group of toddlers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".