Altered Brain Responses to Noxious Dentoalveolar Stimuli in High-Impact Temporomandibular Disorder Pain Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-impact temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain may involve brain mechanisms related to central sensitization. We investigated brain responses to stimulation of trigeminal sites not typically associated with TMD pain by applying noxious dentoalveolar pressure to high- and low-impact TMD pain cases and pain-free controls during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Fifty female participants were recruited and assigned to one of three groups based on the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) and Graded Chronic Pain Scale: controls (n=17), low-impact (n=17) and high-impact TMD (n=16). Multimodal whole-brain MRI was acquired following the Human Connectome Project protocol, including stimulus-evoked fMRI scans during which painful dentoalveolar pressure was applied to the buccal gingiva of participants. Group analyses were performed using non-parametric permutation tests for parcellated cortical and subcortical neuroimaging data. There were no significant between-group differences for brain activations/deactivations evoked by the noxious dentoalveolar pressure. For individual group mean activations/deactivations, a gradient in the number of parcels surviving thresholding was found according to the TMD pain grade, with the highest number seen in the high-impact group. Among the brain regions activated in chronic TMD pain groups were those previously implicated in sensory-discriminative and motivational-affective pain processing. These results suggest that dentoalveolar pressure pain evokes abnormal brain responses to sensory processing of noxious stimuli in high-impact TMD pain participants, which supports the presence of maladaptive brain plasticity in chronic TMD pain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".