MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180651192 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20140548

Effectiveness of Manual Therapy and Therapeutic Exercise for Temporomandibular Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2015· review· en· W2180651192 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineData extractionManual therapyPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialSystematic reviewPsychological interventionMeta-analysisMEDLINEPlaceboIntervention (counseling)Evidence-based medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Manual therapy (MT) and exercise have been extensively used to treat people with musculoskeletal conditions such as temporomandibular disorders (TMD). The evidence regarding their effectiveness provided by early systematic reviews is outdated. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to summarize evidence from and evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials that examined the effectiveness of MT and therapeutic exercise interventions compared with other active interventions or standard care for treatment of TMD. DATA SOURCES: Electronic data searches of 6 databases were performed, in addition to a manual search. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials involving adults with TMD that compared any type of MT intervention (eg, mobilization, manipulation) or exercise therapy with a placebo intervention, controlled comparison intervention, or standard care were included. The main outcomes of this systematic review were pain, range of motion, and oral function. Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted in duplicate on specific study characteristics. DATA SYNTHESIS: The overall evidence for this systematic review was considered low. The trials included in this review had unclear or high risk of bias. Thus, the evidence was generally downgraded based on assessments of risk of bias. Most of the effect sizes were low to moderate, with no clear indication of superiority of exercises versus other conservative treatments for TMD. However, MT alone or in combination with exercises at the jaw or cervical level showed promising effects. LIMITATIONS: Quality of the evidence and heterogeneity of the studies were limitations of the study. CONCLUSIONS: No high-quality evidence was found, indicating that there is great uncertainty about the effectiveness of exercise and MT for treatment of 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it