Quality Difference in Craniofacial Pain of Cardiac <i>vs</i> . Dental Origin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Craniofacial pain, whether odontogenic or caused by cardiac ischemia, is commonly referred to the same locations, posing a diagnostic challenge. We hypothesized that the validity of pain characteristics would be high in assessment of differential diagnosis. Pain quality, intensity, and gender characteristics were assessed for referred craniofacial pain from dental (n = 359) vs. cardiac (n = 115) origin. The pain descriptors "pressure" and "burning" were statistically associated with pain from cardiac origin, while "throbbing" and "aching" indicated an odontogenic cause. No gender differences were found. These data should now be added to those craniofacial pain characteristics already known to point to acute cardiac disease rather than dental pathology, i.e., pain provocation/aggravation by physical activity, pain relief at rest, and bilateralism. To initiate prompt and appropriate treatment, dental and medical clinicians as well as the public should be alert to those clinical characteristics of craniofacial pain of cardiac origin.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".