Exploring mental health experience in individuals living with temporomandibular disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the evidence supporting deteriorating mental health because of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) conditions, there is limited evidence of TMD patients' experience regarding how their mental health is affected by the disorders. As a sequence of these conditions, TMD patients suffer from physical and mental complications, not to mention the loss of food enjoyment. In this study, we aim to explore TMD patients' lived experiences who had changed their dietary habits concerning their mental health. Six participants were interviewed to answer open-ended questions during semi-structured interviews regarding their mental health experiences with TMD-related food routine changes. These interviews were held face-to-face with the participants and were recorded and transcribed. Interpretive phenomenology was used to organize and analyze the narrative data collected. We identified three themes amongst participants who have concerns about their mental health that included (i) depraving of favored food, (ii) rethinking in all aspects of their life, and (iii) fear of future. For each of these themes, the participants' mental health was affected by TMD's pain due to diet changes, consequently, lifestyle, daily activities, and hopefulness for a cure. The participants' mental health was mostly unaddressed by their healthcare providers. Our findings highlight the need for healthcare providers to establish nutritional guidelines for TMD individuals at risk of psychological and physiological comorbidities. Also, the need for healthcare for intervention programs to treat people living with chronic TMD pain. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Quality & Clinical Excellence lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework (https://www.theberylinstitute.org/ExperienceFramework). Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".