Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22059204›Full record

ReviewPain research & management

Nonpharmacological management of procedural pain in infants and young children: an abridged Cochrane review.

Rebecca Pillai Riddell, Nicole Racine, Kara Turcotte, Lindsay Uman, Rachel Horton, Laila Din Osmun, Sara Ahola Kohut, Jessica Hillgrove-Stuart, Bonnie Stevens, Diana Lisi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pain research & management. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Pediatric sleep and pain: etiologies, consequences, and clinical considerations.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Rebecca Pillai RiddellDepartment of Psychology, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. rpr@yorku.ca
Nicole Racine
Kara Turcotte
Lindsay Uman
Rachel Horton
Laila Din Osmun
Sara Ahola Kohut
Jessica Hillgrove-Stuart
Bonnie Stevens
Diana Lisi
York University · CAHospital for Sick Children · CAIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute pain and distress during medical procedures are commonplace for young children.

objectiveTo assess the efficacy of nonpharmacological interventions for acute procedural pain in children up to three years of age.

methodsStudy inclusion criteria were: participants <3 years of age, involved in a randomized controlled or crossover trial, and use of a 'no treatment' control group (51 studies; n=3396). Additional studies meeting all criteria except for study design (eg, use of active control group) were qualitatively described (n=20).

resultsFor every intervention, data were analyzed separately according to age group (preterm-born, term-born neonate and older infant ⁄ young child) and type of pain response (pain reactivity, immediate pain-related regulation). The largest standardized mean differences (SMD) for pain reactivity were as follows: sucking-related interventions (preterm: -0.42 [95% CI -0.68 to -0.15]; neonate -1.45 [CI -2.34 to -0.57]), kangaroo care (preterm -1.12 [95% CI -2.04 to -0.21]), and swaddling ⁄ facilitated tucking (preterm -0.97 [95% CI -1.63 to -0.31]). For immediate pain-related regulation, the largest SMDs were: sucking-related interventions (preterm -0.38 [95% CI -0.59 to -0.17]; neonate -0.90 [CI -1.54 to -0.25]), kangaroo care 0.77 (95% CI -1.50 to -0.03]), swaddling ⁄ facilitated tucking (preterm -0.75 [95% CI -1.14 to -0.36]), and rocking ⁄ holding (neonate -0.75 [95% CI -1.20 to -0.30]). The presence of significant heterogeneity limited confidence in nonsignificant findings for certain other analyses.

conclusionsAlthough a number of nonpharmacological treatments have sufficient evidence supporting their efficacy with preterm infants and healthy neonates, no treatments had sufficient evidence to support efficacy with healthy older infants ⁄ young children.

Indexed as

PainChild, PreschoolCross-Over StudiesDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansInfantMalePain ManagementRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID22059204
PMCPMC3206782
OpenAlexW100300157

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.