Analysis of Articles on Neonatal Pain Published from 1965 to 1999

Abstract

Pain in neonates was a neglected subject of publication until the mid-1980s, and, currently, only a few countries seem interested in this type of pain. This lack of interest may be related to the undertreatment of pain in the neonatal period.

A comprehensive categorical and bibliometric analysis of published research articles on pediatric pain from 1975 to 2010

“…Furthermore, the focus on acute pain in childhood might also be prevalent due to growing acknowledgment of the possible role of early life pain experiences in the development of chronic pain or altered pain processing [29]. Similar to earlier reviews [3,13], our findings show a continued increase in research on neonatal pain over time. This likely reflects the increased survival and need for care of preterm neonates and associated ubiquitous procedural pain exposure.…”

“…Prior reviews of the state of the field of pediatric pain research have shown a significant increase in published journal articles on pediatric pain over time, especially in neonates [3,13].…”

A Bibliometric Analysis on Top-Cited Articles in Pain Research

“…Several recently published articles focused on the bibliometric characteristics of pain‐related research. Some focused on a specific syndrome, such as neonatal pain [4], headaches [5], and orofacial pain [6]. Some focused on a specific journal including Pain [7,8] and Clinical Journal of Pain [9].…”

Commentary on Arikan D et al. (2008) Effectiveness of massage, sucrose solution, herbal tea or hydrolysed formula in the treatment of infantile colic. Journal of Clinical Nursing17, 1754–1761

“…Pain in infancy has met increasing interest from the clinical and scientific society since the mid‐1980s (Banos et al. 2001).…”

“…Colic has been studied in both psychological and paediatric research. In a meta‐analysis Banos et al. (2001) found that 20·4% of all scientific articles on neonatal pain, listed in MEDLINE 1965–1999, concerned colic pain.…”