MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The utility of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block versus intrathecal morphine for postoperative analgesia in anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: a multicentre triple blinded randomised controlled trial protocol

2025· other· en· W7084094981 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystal structures of chemical compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMorphineAnalgesicClinical trialBlock (permutation group theory)Nerve blockIntrathecal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a novel regional technique for hip analgesia. Traditionally, intrathecal morphine has been administered for analgesia in hip fracture surgery. Compared with intrathecal morphine, the PENG block may provide superior or equivalent pain score reduction with a more favourable side effect profile and superior patient satisfaction. Methods This is a multicentre blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) that is being conducted at present at two large teaching institutions in Australia. The pericapsular nerve group block (PENG block) shall be compared to low-dose intrathecal morphine for analgesic effect in elective total Hip arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach. Primary outcome shall be dynamic pain score evaluation at 3 and 24 h postoperatively. Discussion This is the protocol of our RCT which is currently in the early stages of active recruitment. Trial registration Ethics approval was obtained from the Southern Area Local Health Network prior to recruitment of the first patient. This trial was prospectively registered prior to initiation on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12623001309673P, 15/12/23, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=386688&showOriginal=true&isReview=true .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicCrystal structures of chemical compoundsFrench-language works237,207