Opioids used to manage acute pain crisis in adults with sickle cell disease in emergency department: Systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In Saudi Arabia, sickle-cell disease is among the most prevalent hematologic hereditary illnesses.In SCD patients, vascular-occlusive pain crises are a common reason for emergency room visits, and patients' suffering may go untreated.This research offers a systematic literature review of the current treatments for acute pain crises in SCD patients.Method: The authors examined five scientific databases-MEDLINE, PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Web of Science-to locate published works through 2023.For every database, a comprehensive search strategy was developed using MeSH keywords.The phrases opioids, anemia, sickle cell, double-blinded, randomized controlled study, acute pain, and clinical trial are used.Results: Six full-text articles with 424 patients were included for our review out of the 201 articles initially gathered from databases.Duplication was removed, and the articles were assessed against inclusion criteria.Of the included studies, three were conducted in the United States, one in Connecticut, one in Maryland, and one in Canada.Using guidelines for higher opioid doses for acute painful episodes in SCD patients was related to better pain outcomes and fewer hospitalizations.According to current standards, patients with SCD should get opioid analgesia within 30 minutes of being triaged.Conclusion: Almost all SCD patients who were hospitalized as a result of acute pain were provided opioids; there's no set method in strict accordance with guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".