Sensory and Affective Components of Orofacial Pain: Is it all in your Brain?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we shall review several chronic orofacial pain conditions with emphasis on those that are essentially refractory to treatment. We shall present a review of current and past literature that describes the various pain phenomena as well as their underlying central mechanisms. New data concerning refractory pain will be used to underscore the importance of central processing of pain, with particular emphasis on neuropsychological and cognitive function and capacity that may play important roles in pain processing and maintenance of the pain state. Further, neurophysiological data showing that the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and other structures in the brain may play key roles in modulation of chronic pain will also be discussed. Although peripheral triggering events surely play an important role in initiating pain, the development of chronic and, in particular, refractory pain may depend on changes or malfunctions in the central nervous system. These changes may be quite subtle and require sophisticated approaches, such as functional MRI, to study them, as is now being done. New findings obtained therefore may lead to more rational and reliable treatment for orofacial pain.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".