Double-blind, Crossover, Placebo-controlled Trial of Bromocriptine in Patients with Sleep Bruxism
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
This study was designed to assess the effects of bromocriptine, a dopamine D2 receptor agonist, on sleep bruxism. Seven otherwise healthy patients with severe and frequent sleep bruxism participated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The study used a crossover design that included 2 weeks of active treatment or placebo with a washout period of 1 week. To further evaluate whether bromocriptine influences striatal D2 receptor binding, we used iodine-123-iodobenzamide single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) under both placebo and bromocriptine regimens. Bromocriptine did not reduce the frequency of episodes of bruxism during sleep (mean +/- SEM, 9.0 +/- 1.0 and 9.6 +/- 1.5 bruxism episodes per hour for placebo and bromocriptine, respectively) or the amplitude of masseter muscle contractions (root mean square values, 48.2 +/- 15.5 microV and 46.9 +/- 12.7 microV for placebo and bromocriptine, respectively). SPECT also failed to reveal that either treatment had any influence on striatal D2 binding (values for total binding in counts/pixel, 1.80 [1.72-1.93] and 1.79 [1.56-1.87] for placebo and bromocriptine, respectively). This study shows that a nightly dose of bromocriptine does not exacerbate or reduce sleep bruxism motor activity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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