Effects of Cold and Vibration on Venipuncture Pain Management in Children Aged 2-7 Years Old: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The pain resulting from venipuncture is one of the primary sources of stress during childhood and can have adverse effects on children. The Buzzy device can play an important role in alleviating the pain of venipuncture in children. Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the independent and combined effects of cold and vibration in reducing venipuncture pain and resistance behavior in children aged 2-7 years. Methods: A total of 130 children who underwent venipuncture were randomly assigned to 4 groups: 32 in the control group, 30 in the external cold group, 37 in the vibration group, and 31 in the cold combined with vibration group. The cold, vibration, and cold combined with vibration interventions used the Buzzy device. Nurses used the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability Pain Behavior Scale and the Children's Behavior Scale to assess pain and resistance behaviors before and during the venipuncture. Results: Compared with the control group, the cold group, vibration group, and cold combined with vibration group experienced milder pain and demonstrated weaker resistance behavior (P<.05). Pairwise comparison results showed that the combination group was superior to the vibration group (P<.05). Conclusions: External cold and vibration are effective in reducing procedural pain and improving compliance in children aged 2-7 years undergoing venipuncture. The cold combined with vibration has a synergistic effect, and the effect is better than vibration only.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".