4 results on '"Sieber R"'
Search Results
2. Who are the publics engaging in AI?
- Author
-
Sieber R, Brandusescu A, Adu-Daako A, and Sangiambut S
- Subjects
- Public Opinion, Politics, Humans, Artificial Intelligence, Community Participation
- Abstract
Given the importance of public engagement in governments' adoption of artificial intelligence systems, artificial intelligence researchers and practitioners spend little time reflecting on who those publics are. Classifying publics affects assumptions and affordances attributed to the publics' ability to contribute to policy or knowledge production. Further complicating definitions are the publics' role in artificial intelligence production and optimization. Our structured analysis of the corpus used a mixed method, where algorithmic generation of search terms allowed us to examine approximately 2500 articles and provided the foundation to conduct an extensive systematic literature review of approximately 100 documents. Results show the multiplicity of ways publics are framed, by examining and revealing the different semantic nuances, affordances, political and expertise lenses, and, finally, a lack of definitions. We conclude that categorizing publics represents an act of power, politics, and truth-seeking in artificial intelligence.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Intravenous acetaminophen does not reduce morphine use for pain relief in emergency department patients: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
- Author
-
Minotti B, Mansella G, Sieber R, Ott A, Nickel CH, and Bingisser R
- Subjects
- Acetaminophen therapeutic use, Analgesics, Opioid therapeutic use, Double-Blind Method, Emergency Service, Hospital, Humans, Morphine, Pain Management, Pain Measurement, Treatment Outcome, Acute Pain diagnosis, Acute Pain drug therapy, Analgesics, Non-Narcotic
- Abstract
Background: Pain is one of the main reasons to present to emergency departments (EDs). Opioids are indispensable for acute pain management but are associated with side effects, misuse, and dependence. The aim of this study was to test whether a single dose of intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (paracetamol) can reduce the use of morphine for pain relief and/or morphine-related adverse events (AEs)., Methods: ED patients >18 years with acute pain (i.e., Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] > 4) were screened for eligibility. Patients with analgesia in the past 6 h, chronic pain, or clinical instability were excluded. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either morphine 0.1 mg/kg and 1 g acetaminophen IV or morphine 0.1 mg/kg and placebo IV. The intervention was double-blinded. Additional morphine 0.05 mg/kg IV was administered every 15 minutes until pain relief (defined as NRS < 4) and whether the pain recurred. The primary outcome was the mean morphine dose for pain relief. Secondary outcomes were the total amount of morphine given, time to achieve pain relief, and AEs., Results: A total of 220 patients were randomized and 202 evaluated for the primary outcome. The mean morphine dose for pain relief was similar in both groups (acetaminophen 0.15 mg ± 0.07 mg/kg, placebo 0.16 ± 0.07 mg/kg). There were no differences in the total amount of morphine given (acetaminophen 0.19 ± 0.09 mg/kg, placebo 0.19 ± 0.1 mg/kg), the time to achieve pain relief (acetaminophen 30 min [95% CI 17-31 min], placebo 30 min [95% CI 30-35 min]), and the frequency of AEs (overall 27.4%). Time to pain recurrence did not differ significantly between the groups (hazard ratio 1.23 [0.76-1.98], p = 0.40)., Conclusions: In ED patients, acetaminophen had no additional effect on pain control or morphine-sparing effect at the time of first morphine administration. Titrated morphine with the algorithm used was highly effective, with 80% of all patients reporting pain relief within 60 min of starting therapy., (© 2022 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Ability of pain scoring scales to differentiate between patients desiring analgesia and those who do not in the emergency department.
- Author
-
Schweizer L, Sieber R, Nickel CH, and Minotti B
- Subjects
- Emergency Service, Hospital, Humans, Pain diagnosis, Pain drug therapy, Pain Measurement methods, Retrospective Studies, Analgesia, Pain Management
- Abstract
Background and Importance: Pain is one of the most reasons for a visit to an emergency department (ED). Pain scores as the verbal rating scale (VRS) or numerical rating scale (NRS) are used to determine pain management. While it is crucial to measure pain levels, it is equally important to identify patients who desire pain medication, so that adequate provision of analgesia can occur., Objective: To establish the association between pain scores on the NRS and VRS, and the desire for, and provision of, pain medication., Design, Settings and Participants: Retrospective monocentric observational cohort study of ED patients presenting with painful conditions., Outcomes Measure and Analysis: The primary outcome was to establish for each pain score (NRS and/or VRS), those patients who desired, and were ultimately provided with, pain medication, and those who did not. Secondary outcomes included establishing the prediction of pain scores to determine desire of pain medication, and the correlation between NRS and VRS when both were reported., Main Results: 130,279 patients were included for analysis. For each patient who desired pain medication, pain medication was provided. Proportion of patients desiring pain medication were 4.1-17.8% in the pain score range 0.5-3.5, 31.9-63.4% in the range 4-6.5, and 65-84.6% in the range 7-10. The prediction probability of pain scores to determine desire for pain medication was represented with an AUROC of 0.829 (95% CI 0.826-0.831). The optimal threshold predicting the desire for pain medication would be a pain score of 4.25, with sensitivity 0.86, and specificity 0.68. For the 7835 patients with both NRS and VRS scores available, the Spearman-Rho coefficient assessing correlation was 0.946 (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Despite guidelines currently recommending pain medication in patients with a NRS score > 4, we found a discrepancy between pain scores and desire for pain medication. Results of this large retrospective cohort support that the desire for pain medication in the ED might not be derived from a pain score alone., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.