MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361306839 · doi:10.1016/j.ijnsa.2023.100124

Surgery patients’ perspectives of their role in postoperative pain: A scoping review

2023· review· en· W4361306839 on OpenAlex
Laura L. Walton, Elsie Duff, Rakesh C. Arora, Diana E. McMillan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Studies Advances · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcute painPain managementGold standard (test)Chronic painPostoperative painSurgeryPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Post-operative pain is a major factor in surgical recovery. There is evidence that pain remains undermanaged. Complications related to the undermanagement of acute pain can increase length of stay and contribute to readmission and the development of chronic pain. It is well acknowledged that pain assessment is critical to pain management and that self-report of pain is the gold standard. As a result, patients play a central role in their own pain management. A preliminary review of the literature failed to provide a clear or consistent description of this key patient role. Objective: A scoping review was conducted with the objective of reviewing literature that described adult patients' perspectives or highlighted the adult patient's role in post-operative pain management, including assessment. Understanding patients' attitudes toward their roles in pain management through a scoping review of the current literature is critical for informing research and improvements in post-operative pain management. Design: Scoping review. Methods: The databases searched for the review included CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, and SCOPUS (ending May 2022). Thematic analysis, using the methodology of Arksey and O'Malley, was applied to the records identified. Results: . Conclusions: This paper provides one of the first known comprehensive scoping reviews of surgical patients' perspectives of their role in pain management, including assessment, and offers an important global awareness of this patient role. The findings suggest that improved understanding of patients' perspectives of their roles in pain assessment and treatment is critical to improving post-operative pain management. Engaging patients as partners in their care can facilitate enhanced communication and improving congruence in pain assessment and treatment decisions. The complex nature of patients' beliefs, expectations, and subjective experiences of pain present challenges for health care practitioners. These challenges can be met with enhanced education for patients, respect for patients' beliefs and expectations, and the provision of dignified care.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it