MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003513438 · doi:10.11607/ofph.1268

Can Experimentally Evoked Pain in the Jaw Muscles or Temporomandibular Joint Affect Anterior Bite Force in Humans?

2015· article· en· W2003513438 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abhishek Kumar, Eduardo Castrillón, Peter Svensson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTandlægeforeningenAarhus Universitet
KeywordsTemporomandibular jointAffect (linguistics)MedicineBite force quotientAnatomyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationOrthodonticsPsychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To test the hypothesis that experimental pain in the masseter muscle or temporomandibular joint (TMJ) will decrease the anterior maximum voluntary bite force (MVBF) and jaw muscle activity in relation to the perceived effort. METHODS: Sixteen volunteers participated in two experimental sessions. Participants were injected with 0.2 mL of monosodium glutamate (1.0 M) into either the masseter muscle or TMJ. The MVBF and corresponding electromyographic (EMG) activity of the masseter, anterior temporalis, and digastric muscles were recorded 10 times at an interval of 2 minutes before and after injection. Pain was measured using a visual analog scale and McGill Pain Questionnaire. In addition, participants were asked how they perceived the interference of pain on their biting performance. The data analysis included a two-way analysis of variance model and t test. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in peak pain intensity (P = .066) and duration of pain (P = .608) between painful muscle and TMJ injections, but TMJ injection produced a significantly larger area under the curve (P = .005) and a significantly higher pain rating index (P = .030). Pain in the muscle (P = .421) and TMJ (P = .057) did not significantly change the MVBF from baseline levels. The EMG activity also did not differ significantly from baseline levels during muscle pain. However, there was a significant increase (P = .028) in the EMG activity of the anterior temporalis and a significant decrease (P = .010) in the EMG activity of the anterior digastric muscle compared to baseline during TMJ pain. Subject-based reports also revealed that in the majority of cases (62.5%), pain did not interfere with the MVBF task. CONCLUSION: Experimental pain from either masseter muscle or TMJ did not affect the MVBF, in accordance with the subject-based reports. Jaw muscle activity, except for EMG activity of the anterior temporalis and anterior digastric muscles during TMJ pain, also remained unaffected by pain. The findings suggest that it is not pain in itself but rather how pain is perceived that may lead to adaptation of motor function, supporting an integrated pain adaptation model.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Oral & Facial Pain and HeadacheSame topicTemporomandibular Joint DisordersFrench-language works237,207