MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336015601

Spread and referral of experimental pain in different jaw muscles.

2003· article· en· W2336015601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Svensson, Jesper Leth Bak, Thor Troest

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalysis of varianceRepeated measures designMasseter muscleMcGill Pain QuestionnaireMedicineHypertonic salineVisual analogue scaleMasticatory forceAnesthesiaAnatomyPhysical therapyOrthodonticsInternal medicineMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To test the hypothesis that there would be no differences in perceived pain intensity and spread and referral of pain evoked by injection of a similar amount of hypertonic saline into 6 different jaw-muscle sites in healthy female subjects. METHODS: A total of 15 healthy women participated in 3 experimental sessions separated by 1 week. In a randomized sequence, the deep layers of the masseter, superficial layers of the masseter, anterior temporalis, lateral pterygoid, medial pterygoid, and anterior digastric muscles were injected with 5.8% hypertonic saline (0.2 mL). The subjects rated the perceived intensity of pain on an electronic 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS). The distribution of pain was drawn by the subjects on anatomical maps of the face, and a Danish version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) was filled out. RESULTS: All injections were associated with moderate to strong pain intensity (mean peak value: 5.6 to 6.4 cm) with no significant differences between muscle sites (analysis of variance [ANOVA]: P = .520). Pain rating indices derived from the MPQ did not suggest significant differences between muscle sites (ANOVA: P = .898). However, the area of perceived pain differed significantly between muscle sites (ANOVA: P = .038) with the greatest area following the injection into the anterior temporalis muscle (Tukey: P < .05). On direct inspection, the pain maps appeared quite similar, but a new analysis technique based on a center-of-gravity method revealed significantly different coordinates and length of vectors (ANOVA: P < .001) with longer vectors associated with the pain areas in the anterior temporalis muscle compared with the other muscle sites (Tukey: P < .05). All muscles were frequently associated with referral of pain to intraoral structures (40% to 87%), but only pain in the anterior digastric muscle was referred to the tip of the tongue (53%). CONCLUSION: The data suggest no major differences in pain sensitivity between the examined jaw-muscle sites, but pain in the anterior temporalis muscle spreads to a larger area independent of pain intensity. There are subtle but detectable differences in the location and referral of pain patterns between jaw muscles. This will be helpful in the differential diagnosis of myofascial temporomandibular disorder 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicTemporomandibular Joint DisordersFrench-language works237,207