Effects of physical activity levels on characteristic pain in temporomandibular dysfunctions: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity is known to influence the symptoms of a variety of pain disorders including fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis although the underlying mechanism is not fully understood. In spite of the high prevalence of temporomandibular disorders (TMD), no previous study has objectively evaluated the relationship between TMD and general physical activity. This study aims to investigate the influence of physical activity on pain and disability from TMD, considering various confounders including sleep, systemic inflammation, psychosocial disturbances, and widespread pain. METHODS: This observational cross-sectional study is based on consecutive samples of 100 TMD patients (22 with high pain disability and 78 with low pain disability level). Physical activity levels were assessed with actigraph. Level of pain and disability were evaluated using the Graded Chronic Pain Scale. Hematologic examinations including inflammatory biomarkers were assessed and comorbidities were investigated with validated questionnaires. Differences were analyzed according to disability level. RESULTS: Patients with high disability level spent significantly more time doing both moderate (p = 0.033) and vigorous (p = 0.039) level physical activity. Light physical activity, on the other hand, was associated with low disability but the difference did not reach statistical significance. Time spent in light physical activity was significantly associated with high levels of pain and disability (p = 0.026, β = -0.001) and time spent in vigorous physical activity had significant predictive power (cutoff value 2.5 min per week, AUC 0.643, p = 0.041). Scores of the Jaw Function Limitation Score-20 (p = 0.001), present McGill Pain Score (p = 0.010), and number of people potentially diagnosed with fibromyalgia (p = 0.033) were significantly higher in the high disability group. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate or vigorous physical activity is associated with worse TMD symptoms while light physical activity may be beneficial. Further research related to the amount and frequency of physical activity is necessary to establish clinical guidelines for TMD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinical trial registration of the Clinical Research Information Service of Republic of Korea (number KCT0007107).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".