The effect of an information video on preoperative anxiety level before percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedure: A prospective, randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to show the effect of patient information videos on preoperative anxiety before performing the percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL ) for kidney stones. METHODS: This study was designed as a randomized, controlled trial with patients scheduled for PCNL operation for kidney stones. Demographic information, such as age, gender, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, were collected. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (ST AI) was used to measure anxiety levels. Before informing the patients, anxiety levels were evaluated using the ST AI-state (pre-information ST AI-S) and ST AI-trait (ST AI-T). Patients were randomly divided into two groups: both groups received written and verbal information, while the "video" group was also shown a video of a PCNL procedure. The post-information anxiety levels of both groups were evaluated using ST AI-S (post-information). RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were included in the study and 50 patients were included in each group after nine patients were excluded. The participants in the two groups were similar in terms of gender distribution, mean age, and pre-information ST AI-S scores. Post-information ST AI-S scores were statistically significantly lower in the video group (p=0.02). There was no significant difference between post-information and pre-information ST AI-S scores in the no-video group (p=0.86), whereas a significant decrease was found in post-information ST AI-S scores in the video group (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to written and verbal information before PCNL operations, informative videos are an inexpensive, effective method to reduce preoperative anxiety levels. Video-based briefing may be routinely used in addition to preoperative verbal and written information.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.006 | 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".