Effectiveness of Buzzy on Pain and Anxiety in Children and Adolescents Undergoing Needle Procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of cold vibration through the Buzzy device appears promising in reducing pain and anxiety levels in children and adolescents during needle-related procedures. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes and evaluates the evidence on this non-pharmacological treatment for pediatric patients undergoing venipuncture or injection procedures. A search was conducted across 6 databases in January 2025. Sixteen randomized controlled trials, involving a total of 1486 patients, were included. Cold vibration stimulation significantly reduced pain (Standard Mean Difference SMD -1.06, 95% confidence interval [-1.39, -0.72], P < .00001) and anxiety levels (SMD -1.60, 95% confidence interval [-2.70, -0.51], P = .004) compared to the control group. The judgment for the direction of the recommendation was rated "for" the Buzzy intervention, with the strength of the recommendation rated as "weak." The use of cold vibration through the Buzzy device may have beneficial effects in reducing anxiety and pain levels in children and adolescents undergoing needle procedures.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".