Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26002613›Full record

Trial reportMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2015

Assessment of the Sensitivity, Specificity, and Accuracy of Thermography in Identifying Patients with TMD.

Krzysztof Woźniak, Liliana Szyszka-Sommerfeld, Grzegorz Trybek, Dagmara Piątkowska

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Infrared thermography of the crânio-cervico-mandibular complex in wind and string instrumentalists.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Krzysztof WoźniakDepartment of Orthodontics, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.
Liliana Szyszka-SommerfeldDepartment of Orthodontics, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.
Grzegorz TrybekDepartment of Dental Surgery, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.
Dagmara PiątkowskaDepartment of Orthodontics, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of the present study was to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of thermography in identifying patients with temporomandibular dysfunction (TMD). MATERIAL AND

methodsThe study sample consisted of 50 patients (27 women and 23 men) ages 19.2 to 24.5 years (mean age 22.43±1.04) with subjective symptoms of TMD (Ai II-III) and 50 patients (25 women and 25 men) ages 19.3 to 25.1 years (mean age 22.21±1.18) with no subjective symptoms of TMD (Ai I). The anamnestic interviews were conducted according to the three-point anamnestic index of temporomandibular dysfunction (Ai). The thermography was performed using a ThermaCAM TMSC500 (FLIR Systems AB, Sweden) independent thermal vision system. Thermography was closely combined with a 10-min chewing test.

resultsThe results of our study indicated that the absolute difference in temperature between the right and left side (ΔT) has the highest diagnostic value. The diagnostic effectiveness of this parameter increased after the chewing test. The cut-off points for values of temperature differences between the right and left side and identifying 95.5% of subjects with no functional disorders according to the temporomandibular dysfunction index Di (specificity 95.5%) were 0.26°C (AUC=0.7422, sensitivity 44.3%, accuracy 52.4%) before the chewing test and 0.52°C (AUC=0.7920, sensitivity 46.4%, accuracy 56.3%) after it.

conclusionsThe evaluation of thermography demonstrated its diagnostic usefulness in identifying patients with TMD with limited effectiveness. The chewing test helped in increasing the diagnostic efficiency of thermography in identifying patients with TMD.

Indexed as

Area Under CurveBody TemperatureData AccuracyFemaleHumansMaleMasticationSensitivity and SpecificityTemporomandibular Joint DisordersThermographyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26002613
PMCPMC4451701

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.