Periodontal Treatment and Quality of Life of Chronic Facial Pain Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research is to determine the impact of periodontal treatment on the quality of life of patients with concomitant chronic headache or facial pain and periodontal disease. Thirty-eight consecutive patients with chronic periodontal disease were divided according to the presence of chronic craniofacial pain (CFP):Study Group-with CFP and Control Group-without CFP. They were evaluated with the Clinical protocol of the Orofacial Pain Clinic, the WHOQOL-bref and the McGill Pain Questionnaire. All patients received periodontal treatment. The Study Group presented worst quality of life than the Control Group. Nevertheless, the Study Group showed trend improvement in the psychological score (p=0.06) and affective descriptors at the McGill Pain Questionnaire improved (p=0.014) after periodontal treatment. There were no significant changes in quality of life from pre- to post- operatory evaluations in both groups (p>0.05). We conclued that chronic craniofacial pain sufferers presented worst score at physical and psychological domain of quality of life, however there was an improvement in their psychological state 180 days after periodontal treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".