Association Between Stress, Sleep Quality and Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction: Simulated Mars Mission
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to test the association between quality of sleep and stress in individuals with TMD (temporomandibular joint dysfunction) in simulated Mars mission. METHODS: The 24 healthy crew members were recruited. The physiological measures of systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) were recorded. The Symptom Checklist-90-revised was used which was based on nine dimensions of psychological functioning. The Multidimensional Pain Inventory was pain severity, social and physical activities, affective distress, social support, and feelings of life control. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was used to measure the number of hours spent in bed and during asleep, frequency and reasons for awakening, and difficulty returning to sleep after awakening. The orofacial pain questionnaire was applied to measure pain experience using descriptors from the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Salivary cortisol and melatonin were measured. RESULTS: The 15 crew members reported temporomandibular joint pain after 6 days of mission. On dental examination, 5 crew members reported simple muscle pain (SM) and other 10 crew members with TMD. The TMD group endorsed more affective descriptors of their pain experience. Compared to the TMD group, the SM group also reported significantly poorer sleep duration. The TMD group reported nonsignificantly more daytime dysfunction than the control. Higher levels of salivary cortisol and salivary melatonin were reported in the TMD group as compared to other group. CONCLUSION: This study concludes that both quality of sleep and stress levels due to extreme condition (simulated Mars mission) were associated with TMD in simulated Mars mission.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".