The relationship between nitrous oxide sedation and psychosocial factors in the pediatric outpatient setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Moderate sedation using nitrous oxide (N 2 O) has become common in pediatric dentistry. However, less is known regarding the role of patients' characteristics and psychosocial factors in their cooperative behavior during dental procedures with N 2 O. Aims This study aimed to examine pediatric dental patients' behaviors while undergoing N 2 O sedation and to measure the associations between child's cooperative behavior and demographic, physiological responses, and psychosocial factors. Methods In this within‐subject observational study, participants received 40% N 2 O/O 2 , by nasal hood, for non‐surgical dental procedures. The main outcome measure was the extent of cooperative behaviors, as assessed by the Frankl scale at five timepoints, namely T1: pre‐administration of N 2 O, T2: post‐administration of N 2 O, T3: dental injection, T4: dental treatment, and T5: post‐procedure administration of 100% O 2 . Predictors included age, sex, psychosocial factors reported using the Parenting Style and Dimension Questionnaire and Spence Children Anxiety Scale, as well as pulse rate, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation. The Wilcoxon signed‐rank test and generalized estimation equation were used for data analyses. Results In 80 children with a mean age of 7.2 (2.2) years, administration of N 2 O was significantly associated with cooperative behaviors (odds ratio [OR]:2.62, confidence interval [CI]: 1.46–4.70, p = .001) when adjusted for other predictors. There was no interaction between any of the predictors and N 2 O sedation on behaviors. Except for the authoritative parenting style (OR: 1.96, CI: 1.16–3.31, p = .012), which predicted more cooperative behaviors, other predictors were not associated with behavioral outcomes. Conclusion In children sedated with N 2 O, behavior was independent of the child's demographic and psychosocial factors. While sedated, demographics, vital signs, and anxiety did not contribute to behavior management. However, screening for parenting style may help predict the child's behavioral response.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".