Quantitative Polygraphic Controlled Study on Efficacy and Safety of Oral Splint Devices in Tooth-grinding Subjects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy of occlusal splints in diminishing muscle activity and tooth-grinding damage remains controversial. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of an occlusal splint (OS) vs. a palatal control device (PCD). Nine subjects with sleep bruxism (SB) participated in this randomized study. Sleep laboratory recordings were made on the second night to establish baseline data. Patients then wore each of the splints in the sleep laboratory for recording nights three and four, two weeks apart, according to a crossover design. A statistically significant reduction in the number of SB episodes per hour (decrease of 41%, p = 0.05) and SB bursts per hour (decrease of 40%, p < 0.05) was observed with the two devices. Both oral devices also showed 50% fewer episodes with grinding noise (p = 0.06). No difference was observed between the devices. Moreover, no changes in respiratory variables were observed. Both devices reduced muscle activity associated with SB.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it