Clinically Established Temporomandibular Involvement in Adults With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To study clinical variables defining temporomandibular function in adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and healthy controls. Methods In this cross-sectional study, the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) screening protocol, mandibular range of motion (MROM), and anterior maximum voluntary bite force (AMVBF) were compared between adults with JIA and healthy controls. Unadjusted and adjusted models with corrections for sex and disease duration were constructed for active maximum interincisal mouth opening (AMIO) and AMVBF. Results A total of 100 adults with JIA and 59 healthy adults were included in this study. In adults with JIA, 56% had clinically established TMJ involvement. AMIO was the MROM variable most reduced by TMJ involvement; AMIO was 8.8 mm (95% CI −11.40 to −6.12;P< 0.001) less in adults with JIA with TMJ involvement compared to JIA without TMJ involvement. No differences of AMIO were found between healthy adults and adults with JIA without TMJ involvement (−2.52, 95% CI −5.13 to 0.10;P= 0.06). Male sex was associated with a higher AMIO, and disease duration was associated with a decreased AMIO. Collinearity between the subtype prebiologic era and disease duration was found. AMVBF did not differ between adults with JIA and healthy adults. Conclusion The high prevalence of clinically established TMJ involvement in adults with JIA indicates the need for awareness of TMJ problems in adults with JIA. TMJ involvement negatively influenced AMIO and should therefore be part of the TMJ screening in adults with JIA. AMVBF seems to have less utility for TMJ screening in adult populations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".