MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394854185 · doi:10.3389/fpain.2024.1375868

Parent-led neonatal pain management—a narrative review and update of research and practices

2024· article· en· W4394854185 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Ullsten, Marsha Campbell‐Yeo, Mats Eriksson

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pain Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHarmAnxietyPsychologyBest practiceBreastfeedingNursingInterpersonal communicationPsychiatrySocial psychologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Research related to parent-led neonatal pain management is increasing, as is the clinical implementation. Skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding and parents' vocalizations are examples of pain reducing methods that give parents an opportunity to protect their infant from harm while alleviating their anxiety and developing their parenting skills. Methods: In this paper we will provide a narrative review and describe the current research about parent-led neonatal pain management. Based on this we will discuss clinical challenges, implementation strategies and implications for future research. Results: Parents express great readiness to embrace opportunities to increase their self-efficacy in their ability to address infant pain. Parent-led pain-reducing methods are effective, feasible, cost-effective, culturally sensitive, and can be individualized and tailored to both the parent's and infant's needs. Both barriers and facilitators of parent-led pain care have been studied in research highlighting structural, organizational, educational, and intra- and interpersonal aspects. For example, health care professionals' attitudes and beliefs on parent-led methods, and their concern that parental presence during a procedure increases staff anxiety. On the other hand, the presence of a local pain champion whose duty is to facilitate the adoption of pain control measures and actively promote parent-professional collaboration, is crucial for culture change in neonatal pain management and nurses have a key role in this change. The knowledge-to-practice gap in parent-led management of infants' procedure-related pain highlight the need for broader educational applications and collaborative professional, parental and research initiatives to facilitate practice change. Conclusion: Parent-led neonatal pain management is more than simply a humane and compassionate thing to do. The inclusion of parent-led pain care has been scientifically proven to be one of the most effective ways to reduce pain associated with repeated painful procedures in early life and parents report a desire to participate. Focus on enablers across interprofessional, organizational and structural levels and implementation of recommended pediatric pain guidelines can support the provision of optimal evidence-based family-centered neonatal pain management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.381 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Pain ResearchSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207