The Relationship between Temporal Changes in Subjective Symptoms, Mental States and Sensory Thresholds after Inferior Alveolar Nerve Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated relationships between changes in sensory thresholds, subjective symptoms, and mental states over time in 55 patients who had sensory disturbances on their unilateral lower lip and chin.The sensory thresholds were determined by nine different testing modalities which included static light touch, two-point discrimination, warm/cool/heat stimulation, 5-Hz rectangular current stimulation, and current perception thresholds (2,000Hz, 250Hz, 5Hz). Obtained thresholds were classified into five scores (0–4), and the average of the scores for all the tests was calculated as the individual score (average score).To investigate what kind of subjective sensations the patients were experiencing, the McGill Pain Questionnaire (Japanese version) was applied. The degree of hindrance in daily life, degree of subjective sensory abnormality, and daily duration of sensory disturbance were investigated using visual analog scales. To investigate the patient's mental state, we used the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.Neither the changes in subjective symptoms nor the mental states of anxiety and depression showed a significant correlation with recovery in sensory thresholds (i.e., the average scores). The changes in patients' subjective symptoms and mental states were not associated with the appearance/disappearance of hypersensitivity to thermal stimulation or current perception thresholds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".