MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285230846 · doi:10.1177/25158163221097352

Temporomandibular disorder and headache prevalence: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4285230846 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pankaew Yakkaphan, Pav Chana, Tara Renton, Giorgio Lambru

Bibliographic record

VenueCephalalgia Reports · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeadachesMedicineMeta-analysisEpidemiologyPopulationTemporomandibular disorderPrevalenceMigraineInternal medicinePhysical therapyPediatricsTemporomandibular jointSurgeryDentistryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and headaches are prevalent among the global population. Patients often suffer from both conditions, and they are likely to be associated in a bidirectional way. However, the nature of the association remains unclear. Understanding the epidemiological aspects of the relationship between these conditions could have important clinical implications. Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of headaches in TMD patients as well as the prevalence of TMD in patients who suffer from headaches. Method: A systematic literature search was conducted using electronic databases. Studies published in English and those that used an acknowledged diagnostic criteria for TMD and headaches were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and meta-analyses were performed to generate pooled prevalence estimates. Result: Thirty-one studies met the selection criteria for the review; 16 studies evaluated the prevalence of headache in TMD patients and 15 studies evaluated the prevalence of TMD in headache patients. The included studies were of moderate-to-high quality. Meta-analyses revealed moderate-to-large heterogeneities across included studies. Pooled prevalence estimates from meta-analyses indicated similar rates of headaches in TMD patients and of TMD in headache patients (61.58%, 95% CI 45.26–76.66 and 59.42%, 95% CI 51.93–66.60, respectively). Migraines were more commonly observed in TMD patients (40.25%, 95% CI 35.37–45.23) compared to tension-type headaches (18.89%, 95% CI 12.36–26.44). The prevalence of headaches was particularly high in painful-TMD (82.80%, 95% CI 75.41–89.10). Conclusion: Despite large variance in prevalence rates across included studies, this review suggests headache and TMD frequently co-occur, particularly in the case of migraines and muscle related TMD. This association has important clinical, pathophysiological and therapeutic implications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.036
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.108
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCephalalgia ReportsSame topicTemporomandibular Joint DisordersFrench-language works237,207