MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576266422

Cognitions, chronicity, distress and disability in temporomandibular disorder (idiopathic orofacial pain)

2002· dissertation· en· W2576266422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
RG Madland

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · 2002
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPain catastrophizingAnxietyPsychosocialOrofacial painCoping (psychology)DistressMcGill Pain QuestionnaireChronic painPsychologyClinical psychologyCognitionPsychiatryPhysical therapyMedicineVisual analogue scale
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis attempts to bring the understanding of orofacial pam, and temporomandibular disorder (TMD) in particular, into line with that of other chronic pain conditions, in order that the principles of psychological pain control through education and self-management, apparently effective in other conditions, may be specifically adapted to facial pain. Reviews of the literature on coping, beliefs, depression, and anxiety, establish the current status of theoretically derived measurement instruments, their use in chronic pain patient groups, and the findings there from. Further reviews of psychological aspects of dental pain and primary headache present these as acute and chronic pain conditions for comparison. The first study, assessing disability by means of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP), found no significant relationships between OHIP factors and clinical signs. However, all OHIP factors, except for the functional and physical subscales, correlated significantly with pain intensity, suggesting that psychosocial rather than physical aspects of disability relate to pain report. Anxiety, measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HAD), was associated with pain intensity (McGill Pain Questionnaire, MPQ), catastrophising (Coping Strategies Questionnaire, CSQ), and with 'psychological' pain beliefs (pain Beliefs Questionnaire, PBQ). In addition, anxiety appeared to be related to perceived problems with speech (GHIP). Depressive symptoms (HAD) were associated with 'passive' coping strategies, notably catastrophising, and with emphasis on the impact on tasting and digesting food (OHIP). The second study sought to evaluate how pain symptoms of different character and intensity (MPQ) might influence cognitions relating to cause, time1ine, consequence, and controI/cure (Illness Perceptions Questionnaire, IPQ). Greater intensity of 'constant' pain contributed to greater advocation of physiological cause, and greater perceived consequence of pain on psychosocial functioning, whilst a longer period in full-time education appeared to increase endorsement of psychological causes, and to beneficially influence judgments of time1ine and consequence. Facial pain, though reportedly less painful of lesser consequence, and more controllable than headache, was also found to be less responsive to treatment, as demonstrated over six months following hospital specialist consultation. The contribution of perceived permanence and consequence (lPQ), and of catastrophising (CSQ), to continuing pain, disability, and distress indicates that these factors were suitable targets for a psycho-educational approach aimed specifically at ameliorating pain beliefs and coping strategies. In the final study, a self-management programme for TMD was developed from the findings of the earlier studies, and successfully piloted in a small sample of patients, demonstrating the acceptability of the programme, indicating a need for a full-scale trial.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique)Same topicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia TechniquesFrench-language works237,207