Effect of weather on temporal pain patterns in patients with temporomandibular disorders and migraine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with masticatory muscle pain and migraine typically report that the intensity of pain fluctuates over time and is affected by weather changes. Weather variables, such as ambient temperature and humidity, may vary significantly depending on whether the individual is outdoor or indoor. It is, therefore, important to assess these variables at the individual level using portable monitors, during everyday life. This study aimed to determine and compare the temporal patterns of pain in individuals affected with facial and head pain and to investigate its relation with weather changes. Eleven patients (27·3 ± 7·4 years) with chronic masticatory muscle pain (MP) and twenty (33·1 ± 8·7 years) with migraine headache (MH) were asked to report their current pain level on a visual analogue scale (VAS) every hour over fourteen consecutive days. The VAS scores were collected using portable data-loggers, which were also used to record temperature, atmospheric pressure and relative humidity. VAS scores varied markedly over time in both groups. Pain VAS scores fluctuate less in the MP group than in the MH group, but their mean, minimum and maximum values were higher than those of migraine patients (all P < 0·05). Pain scores <2 cm were more common in the MH than in the MP group (P < 0·001). Perceived intensity of pain was negatively associated with atmospheric pressure in the MP group and positively associated with temperature and atmospheric in the MH group. Our results reveal that patients with masticatory muscle pain and patients with migraine present typical temporal pain patterns that are influenced in a different way by weather changes.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".