The effect of the distraction of thought by music on pain relief in patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and aims: The distraction of thought is a technique in which a pleasant stimulus is presented to the patient. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the distraction of thought by music on pain relief in patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Methods: This clinical trial was performed on 120 patients referring to Ayatollah Kashani Hospital in Shahrekord for ESWL in 2019. Patients were randomly divided into two experimental and control groups. In addition to routine care, the experimental group received the natural sound of the event, along with its beautiful scenery, while the control group only received routine care. The pain score was measured by the McGill Pain Questionnaire. The data obtained were analyzed by SPSS (version 18) using paired and independent t-tests and Tukey’s test. Results: The two groups were significantly different in terms of pain changes (P=0.007). The mean difference in addictive drug consumption between the control and experimental groups was significant (P=0 004). Conclusion: Thought distraction by music reduces pain and narcotic use of analgesics by the patients under ESWL.
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 | 0.024 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".