An Evidence summary of postoperative pain management in spinal surgery
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To search and evaluate the evidence of postoperative pain management in spinal surgery so as to promote the standardized management of postoperative pain in patients with spinal surgery. Methods According to the "6S" evidence model, evidence of management of postoperative pain in spinal surgery were systematically searched from BMJ Best Practice, UpToDate, Cochrane library, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI), National Guideline Clearinghouse(NGC), National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence(NICE), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network(SIGN), Guidelines International Network(GIN), Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario(RNAO), China Medical Network, PubMed, Web of science, Embase, EBSCO, Chinese Biomedical Medicine(CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI), WanFang Data. Results A total of 10 articles were selected, including 1 clinical decisions, 2 evidence summary, 5 guidelines, 1expert opinion, 1 expert consensus, best evidences were summarized from the 5 aspects of pain evaluation, intervention, monitoring, education and organization. Conclusion This study summarized the best evidence of postoperative pain management in spinal surgery, which provided evidence for clinical application. In the process of evidence transformation, standards should be formulated to regulate the pain management behavior of medical staff in combination with clinical practice, so as to reduce postoperative pain in patients with spinal surgery and improve the quality of nursing (目的 检索并评价脊柱外科术后疼痛管理的相关证据, 以促进脊柱外科术后患者疼痛的规范化管理。方法 按照“6S”证据模型, 系统检索BMJ Best Practice、UpToDate、Cochrane library、Joanna Briggs Institute(JBI)、美国指南网、英国国家临床医学研究所指南网、苏格兰院际间指南网、国际网络指南网、加拿大安大略省注册护士协会网站、中国医脉通指南网、PubMed、Web of science、Embase、Ebsco、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网、万方数据库中关于脊柱外科术后疼痛评估管理的相关证据。结果 共纳入文献10篇, 包括临床决策1篇, 证据总结2篇, 指南5篇, 专家意见1篇, 专家共识1篇, 从疼痛评估、干预、监测、教育以及组织5个方面汇总最佳证据。结论 脊柱外科术后疼痛管理的证据总结可为临床应用提供循证依据, 在证据转化过程中应结合临床实际制定标准规范医护人员的疼痛管理行为, 降低脊柱外科术后患者疼痛, 提高护理质量。)
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it