Preclinical orofacial pain assays and measures and chronic primary orofacial pain research: where we are and where we need to go
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic primary orofacial pain (OFP) conditions such as painful temporomandibular disorders (pTMDs; i.e., myofascial pain and arthralgia), idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia (TN), and burning mouth syndrome (BMS) are seemingly idiopathic, but evidence support complex and multifactorial etiology and pathophysiology. Important fragments of this complex array of factors have been identified over the years largely with the help of preclinical studies. However, findings have yet to translate into better pain care for chronic OFP patients. The need to develop preclinical assays that better simulate the etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical symptoms of OFP patients and to assess OFP measures consistent with their clinical symptoms is a challenge that needs to be overcome to support this translation process. In this review, we describe rodent assays and OFP pain measures that can be used in support of chronic primary OFP research, in specific pTMDs, TN, and BMS. We discuss their suitability and limitations considering the current knowledge of the etiology and pathophysiology of these conditions and suggest possible future directions. Our goal is to foster the development of innovative animal models with greater translatability and potential to lead to better care for patients living with chronic primary OFP.
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 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 | 0.094 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".