Influence of cognitive performance on the response to pain education guidelines in patients with chronic painful temporomandibular disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with painful temporomandibular disorders (TMD) may present cognitive performance alterations, making it difficult to understand and adhering to self-management strategies offered in pain education interventions. The aim of this study was to analyze the response to self-management guidelines in patients with chronic painful TMD due to cognitive performance. METHODS: Sample of 45 patients (35.5 years) with chronic painful TMD according to Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD). Cognitive performance was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test. The Brazilian Portuguese Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI- -BP) was also applied to measure central sensitization and numerical rating scale to assess the perception of pain intensity. The intervention consisted of self-care guidelines for pain management with homemade methods, through a video and a printed tutorial. After an interval of 15 days, a new evaluation was made to verify whether the self-management guidelines promoted pain-related changes in the sample studied and whether there were differences between participants with adequate and altered cognitive performance (groups obtained after the application of the test). RESULTS: The mean MoCA for the sample was 23.3±2.5 (lower than expected cognitive performance). A strong inverse correlation was found between the cognitive performance and pain intensity scores, indicating the tendency to have lower cognitive performance when there is greater intensity of pain (r=-0.77 and p=0.03). There was no correlation between cognitive performance and central sensitization (p>0.05). The group with better cognitive performance presented better response to pain education strategies. CONCLUSION: There is a trend towards worse cognitive performance according to the increase in perception of painful intensity. In addition, low cognitive performance seems to impair the use and efficacy of pain education-based intervention for patients with painful TMD, which is considered an important strategy for its management.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".