MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of alpha binaural beat music on orthodontic pain after initial archwire placement: A randomized controlled trial

2022· article· en· W4320857560 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alia El ALY, Ismaeel Hansa, Donald J. Ferguson, Nikhilesh R. Vaid

Bibliographic record

VenueDental Press Journal of Orthodontics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlaceboMedicineVisual analogue scaleMcGill Pain QuestionnaireRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaBeat (acoustics)Physical therapyBinaural recordingDentistryAudiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article was to evaluate the effect of alpha binaural beat music on pain level after initial placement of a maxillary fixed appliance, compared to music without binaural beats (placebo) and no music (control). METHODS: 60 patients undergoing maxillary fixed orthodontic appliance and initial archwire placement were randomly allocated into the three aforementioned groups. The pain level experienced was monitored for the following seven days, using the short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ). RESULTS / DESCRIPTORS: Intensity of both sensory and psychological aspects of pain reduced significantly in the binaural beat music (BBM) group, compared to the control, after the 5th day. Statistically significant lower affective and total pain scores were also found on day 6 for the placebo group, compared to the control. Present Pain Intensity (PPI): Statistically significant lower scores were found between the BBM group and the control group from days 3 to 7. Statistically significant lower scores were also found between the placebo and the control groups on days 4, 5 and 6. Visual Analog Scale (VAS): Compared to the control group, the placebo group had a lower VAS score on day 4, and the BBM group had lower scores on days 6 and 7. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant reduction of pain demonstrated in the BBM group, compared to the control, toward the end of the first week of treatment. There was no difference in reported pain between the BBM and placebo groups for any of the scores.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDental Press Journal of OrthodonticsSame topicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia TechniquesFrench-language works237,207