Silent Joint in Dispute. Is Intraarticular Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Questionable?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Involvement of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) has a high prevalence in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)1,2. Arthritis of the TMJ in the growing, young individual can have significant implications for craniomandibular growth and development3,4,5. This is because the mandibular condylar cartilage serves as the basis of the primary mandibular endochondral growth site since the growth site is placed within the intracapsular joint. Treatment aims have been to reduce TMJ inflammation and to reduce craniofacial disturbances with normalization of growth. TMJ arthritis, due to the unobtrusive character of the inflammation, has been infrequently recognized, and TMJ has been given its moniker “the forgotten joint”6. However, within recent years no other single joint has received as much attention in patients with JIA as the TMJ. Locally administered therapy, typically in the form of intraarticular corticosteroids (IACS) in the TMJ, has been a frequent strategy in the management of children with JIA within the last 10 years7,8,9,10,11,12. In general, studies have reported on symptomatic relief after IACS injection in the TMJ, including reduced pain and changes in the physical examination findings of maximal incisal opening7,8,12. Two of these studies reported magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) changes with improved effusion in 67%8 and reduced inflammation in the TMJ in 39%12 after IACS. The use of IACS in TMJ has been performed in the light of recognizing IACS as … Address correspondence to Prof. Herlin, Department of Pediatrics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Aarhus N, Denmark. E-mail: troeherl{at}rm.dk
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".