Association Between Sleep Bruxism and Psychosocial Factors in Children and Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To summarize the association between sleep bruxism and psychosocial factors in children and adolescents. DESIGN: Individual search strategies for five databases were developed. The references cited in the selected articles were checked and a partial gray literature search was undertaken. Only articles that used the international diagnostic criteria for sleep bruxism as proposed by the American Association of Sleep Medicine were included. Any form of reporting of psychosocial factors was considered. RESULTS: Of the 44 retained articles, only 7 studies were finally included for the qualitative/quantitative synthesis. No evidence supportive of an association between sleep bruxism and psychosocial factors in children younger than 5 years emerged. A significant association was present in children between 6 and 11 years old and in adolescents 12 to 17 years old. Risk of bias was low-to-moderate in most of the included studies. CONCLUSION: The current available evidence suggests an association between sleep bruxism and psychological factors in children older than 6 years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".