Characterization of facial pain associated with chronic rhinosinusitis using validated pain evaluation instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prior investigations into facial pain associated with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) have yielded important results, but have yet to use pain-specific outcome measures. This study seeks to characterize facial pain associated with CRS using validated pain-specific instruments. METHODS: Adults with CRS were enrolled into a prospective, cross-sectional study along with control participants presenting with non-CRS diagnoses. Facial pain was characterized in both groups using the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) and the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ). CRS-specific measures of disease were measured including the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22), nasal endoscopy, and computed tomography scoring. RESULTS: The patients comprised of CRS with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP; n = 25), CRS without nasal polyposis (CRSsNP; n = 30), and control participants (n = 8). Subjects with CRSwNP and CRSsNP were less likely to be pain free than controls (16.0%, 6.7%, and 62.5% respectively, p = 0.001) and carried greater burden of pain as measured by the BPI-SF and SF-MPQ than controls (p = 0.002 and p = 0.017, respectively). Pain in CRS was most commonly located around the eyes and characterized as "throbbing" and "aching." Nasal polyp status was not associated with differences in character, severity, or location of pain. CONCLUSION: Subjects with CRS have a greater burden of facial pain relative to control subjects across several standardized pain measures. Further, facial pain in CRS significantly correlated to quality of life and CRS-specific disease severity measures. Study across larger cohorts using standardized pain measures is warranted to clarify the association of facial pain with CRS.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".