Emergence from General Anaesthesia: Can We Discriminate between Emergence Delirium and Postoperative Pain?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unsettled behaviors characterize the early phase after general anaesthesia in the pediatric population in up to 80% of cases. Emergence delirium (ED) and acute pain are the two most relevant sources of this phenomenon. Research and clinical guidelines are difficult to implement due to the variability of the definition of unsettled behavior and measurement of the different components. The most probable incidence of ED is between 10% and 20%, and the potential risk factors could be summarized as young age, male gender, preoperative anxiety, baseline sleep-disordered breathing, volatile anaesthesia and ENT or ophthalmologic surgery. Self-reporting behavioral and observational scales are unable to reliably differentiate between ED and pain in a child who is not fully awake, making correct treatment choices difficult. This may lead to an undertreatment of pain in agitated children or to the overuse of opioids for self-limiting ED. This paper considers the current knowledge on the identification and treatment of ED and pain and provides a pragmatic approach for daily practice.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".