The effect of Plantago major cream on intensity of pain and episiotomy wound healing in nulliparous women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: One of the medical interventions in childbirth is episiotomy which is used to widen the pelvic outlet. Plantago is one of the oldest medicinal plants that have wound healing properties due to its flavonoids and phenolic compounds. The present study was performed aimed to determine the effect of plantago cream on intensity of pain and episiotomy wound healing in nulliparous women.Methods: This triple-blind clinical trial study was performed in 2019 on 107 nulliparous women who had referred to Valiasr Hospital in Birjand for natural childbirth. The participants were randomly divided into two groups of placebo and drug. After delivery, mothers used 2-3 cm of prescribed cream on the sutures for 10 days and twice a day. The wound healing rate was evaluated on the third, seventh and tenth days after delivery using the Reda tool. Data were analyzed using SPSS 21 software and Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests. P< 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results: The mean of Reda score in the drug group was 3.433 ± 0.635 on the third day, and 0.773 ± 0.422 on the seventh day, but in the placebo group, it was 5.611 ± 0.492, 2.185 0 0.478, respectively. The two groups had significant difference on the third and seventh days in terms of wound healing (p<0.001). The median McGill score in the drug group was 26 on the third day and 7 on the seventh day, but in the placebo group, it was 44 and 19, respectively, and the two groups had a statistically significant difference in terms of pain intensity on the third and seventh day (P<0.001)Conclusion: The use of plantago cream in comparison with placebo increases the speed of improvement of pain intensity and episiotomy wound healing in nulliparous women.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".