ArticleJournal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons2020
An
Article in Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectives: This study is aimed to evaluate and compare the effect of moist heat fomentation therapy with ultrasound therapy in patients with the masticatory myalgia. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study was conducted on 42 patients with masticatory myalgia, dividing them into two groups; Group A (21 patients), received moist heat therapy and Group B (21 patients), received ultrasound therapy for seven effective days. Prior and after the treatment the numeric rating scale (NRS) and the electromyography (EMG) scores were recorded and compared. The observations were analyzed clinically and statistical support was taken to assess the NRS and EMG data.
resultsIrrespective of the groups, patients testified a significant reduction in pain after the treatment. From the EMG readings; even though the standard deviation for each group was varied considerably, EMG recorded an improved muscle activity. Statistical analysis was used to assess and identify the best treatment methodology between the two modalities.
conclusionFrom the statistical analysis, it is concluded that, though both the therapies had significantly reduced the symptomatic response, it is moist heat fomentation that improved muscle activity both statistically and clinically in comparison to ultrasound.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.