Changes in Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction Symptoms Following Massage Therapy: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this case report was to describe the effects that massage therapy had on a woman with temporomandibular joint dysfunction. PARTICIPANT: The 26-year-old woman's primary symptoms were pain, decreased range of motion, clicking, and crepitus. These symptoms were reportedly associated with emotional stress and bruxism. INTERVENTION: Ten 45-minute massage therapy treatments were administered over a five-week period. The client's progress was monitored by an initial, midway, and final assessment, using range of motion testing, personal interview, an orthopedic test, and postural analysis. Progress was also evaluated by the use of a daily journal. The client participated in a home care routine consisting of stretches, self-massage, postural training, a proprioception exercise, and hydrotherapy. RESULTS: Results include an increase in maximal opening from 3.1 cm to 3.8 cm, an overall increase in neck range of motion, a decrease in muscle hypertonicity using the Wendy Nickel's Scale, a decrease in pain from 7/10 to 3/10 on a numerical pain scale, and a decline in stress. CONCLUSION: Although the client in this report experienced positive results, more extensive studies are needed to understand the effects of massage on TMD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".