The association between the cervical spine, the stomatognathic system, and craniofacial pain: a critical review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Craniofacial pain is a term that encompasses pain in the head, face, and related structures. Multiple etiologies and factors may be related to craniofacial pain; however, the association between the cervical spine and its related structures and craniofacial pain is still a topic of debate. The objective of this critical review was to present and analyze the evidence of the associations between the cervical spine, stomatognathic system, and craniofacial pain. METHODS: A search of the databases Medline, PubMed, Embase, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, and HealthStar was conducted for all publications related to the topic in the English and Spanish languages. Relevant information was also derived from reference lists of the retrieved publications. The key words used in the search were cervical spine, cervical vertebrae, neck pain, neck injuries, neck muscles, craniofacial pain, orofacial pain, facial pain, temporomandibular joint pain, and temporomandibular joint disorders. RESULTS: The search provided information referring to the biomechanical, anatomical, and pathological association between craniofacial pain, the stomatognathic system and the cervical spine. CONCLUSION: The information provided by this review suggests an association between the cervical spine, stomatognathic system, and craniofacial pain, but most of this information is not conclusive and was derived from poor-quality studies (levels 3b, 4, and 5 based on Sackett's classification). Better designed studies are needed in order to clarify the real influence that the cervical spine has in relation to the stomatognathic system and craniofacial pain.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".