Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34501749›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Effect of Distraction Intervention for Needle-Related Pain and Distress in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mi-Kyoung Cho, Mi-Young Choi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mi-Kyoung ChoDepartment of Nursing Science, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1406-1149
Mi-Young ChoiDepartment of Nursing Science, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9564-4161

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted to evaluate the combined effect of distraction intervention for needle-related pain in order to provide the basis for developing an effective nursing intervention for children. We searched three electronic databases, PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL, for original articles published in the period from 1 January 2011 to 31 July 2019. In addition, a manual search was performed on the basis of references in the literature and the references of the articles in pursuit of comprehensive data until 10 December 2019. Meta-analysis was performed by the synthesis of the effect size, homogeneity, heterogeneity, and trim-and-fill method using MIX 2.0 Pro. Well-planned RCTs, single-center studies, high-quality studies, participants older than 10 years of age, and visual and clown distraction interventions were effective for needle-related pain and distress management among children. The results showed evidence supporting the effect of distraction interventions for children's needle-related pain and distress. Through this review, strategies were identified to design better interventions to improve the outcomes.

Indexed as

NeedlesPainChildHumansImmunizationchilddistraction interventiondistressmeta-analysisneedle-related painsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34501749
PMCPMC8430753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.