EFECTIVIDAD DE LA VALORACIÓN Y MANEJO DEL DOLOR EN PACIENTES PEDIÁTRICOS QUE ACUDEN AL SERVICIO DE EMERGENCIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To systematize the evidence on the effectiveness of the assessment and management of pain in pediatric patients who attend the emergency service. Materials and Methods:The type of research is quantitative, the design of the study is systematic review, the population was 64 articles, and the sample was 10 scientific articles published and indexed in the scientific databases, the instrument was search based of data: PubMed, scielo, pubmed heald, MEDES, Dialnet, for the evaluation of the articles the GRADE method was used which evaluated the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation, the articles of 100%; 20% correspond to Spain, 20% to Canada, 20% to Australia, 20% to the US and 10% to Cuba and Switzerland.In relation to study designs, 30% corresponded to cross-sectional studies, 30% to a retrospective observational study, 10% to an analytical observational study, 10% to a comparative descriptive pilot study, 10% to a clinical trial and 10% to a transversal analysis.Results: Of the sample of 10 articles reviewed, the effectiveness of the assessment and management of pain in pediatric patients is 50% and in the other 50% it is not effective.Conclusions: it is concluded that 50% of the articles reviewed evidence the effectiveness of the assessment and management of pain in pediatric patients who come to the emergency service, because these are two necessary and essential actions to carry out an adequate pediatric patient care.with pain; where the nursing professional, assesses, relieves the pain and anxiety of the pediatric patient.Fifty percent of the articles reviewed conclude that the evaluation and management of pain in pediatric patients attending the emergency service is not effective; because the nursing staff presents little commitment, they do not carry out training or updates on the subject of study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".