Analgesic action of gabapentin on chronic pain in the masticatory muscles: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic masticatory myalgia (CMM) can be defined as constant pain in the masticatory muscles for more than 6 months and is influenced by the central nervous system. The antiepileptic agent gabapentin acts centrally and is used for managing different types of chronic pain conditions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the analgesic action of gabapentin on CMM. In this 12-week randomized controlled clinical trial 50 patients were randomly allocated into two study groups: 25 received gabapentin and 25 received placebo. The outcome measures utilized were pain reported on a VAS (VAS-pain), Palpation Index (PI) and impact of CMM on daily functioning reported on a VAS (VAS-function). Thirty-six patients completed the study. Gabapentin showed to be clinically and statistically superior to placebo in reducing pain reported by patients (gabapentin=51.04%; placebo=24.30%; P=0.037), masticatory muscle hyperalgesia (gabapentin=67.03%; placebo=14.37%; P=0.001) and impact of CMM on daily functioning (gabapentin=57.70%; placebo=16.92%; P=0.022). It can be concluded from this study that gabapentin is effective for the management of CMM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".