Association between sleep bruxism and stress symptoms in adults: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To synthesise and critically review the association between sleep bruxism (SB) and stress symptoms in adults. A systematic review was performed. The search was completed using seven primary electronic databases in addition to a grey literature search. Two reviewers blindly selected studies based on pre-defined eligibility criteria. Risk of bias of the included articles was performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies. RevMan 5.4 was used to perform the meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Ten studies were included for qualitative analysis, of which three were included for quantitative analysis. Three studies were evaluated to have low risk of bias, and seven were assessed with moderate risk of bias. Quality of evidence was classified as very low for all outcomes. Individuals with SB were found to have higher levels of some self-reported stress symptoms as assessed through questionnaires with a mean difference of 4.59 (95% CI 0.26-8.92). Biomarkers like epinephrine, norepinephrine, cortisol, adrenaline, dopamine, noradrenaline and prolidase enzyme levels also showed a positive association with SB. Although some associations were identified between probable SB and self-reported stress symptoms and biomarkers of stress in adults, given that the quality of evidence was found to be very low, caution should be exercised in interpreting these results. These findings suggest that additional and better designed studies are warranted in order to clarify the link between SB and stress.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it