Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35985779›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Therapy outcome measures in temporomandibular disorder: a scoping review.

Kazuhiro Ooi, Morio Aihara, Hidehisa Matsumura, Shinpei Matsuda, Yuki Watanabe, Hidemichi Yuasa, Yoshizo Matsuka

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Therapeutic challenges in temporomandibular disorders.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2024
    Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Kazuhiro OoiDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan k-ooi@staff.kanazawa-u.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-1678-0158
Morio AiharaAihara Clinic, Hirosaki, Japan.
Hidehisa MatsumuraMatsumura Dental Clinic, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shinpei MatsudaDepartment of Dentistry and Oral Surgery, Unit of Sensory and Locomotor Medicine, Division of Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan.
Yuki WatanabeDivision of Temporomandibular Disorders and Orofacial Pain, Department of Special Needs Dentistry, Showa University Graduate School of Dentistry, Tokyo, Japan.
Hidemichi YuasaOral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Toyohashi Medical Center, Toyohashi, Japan.
Yoshizo MatsukaDepartment of Stomatognathic Function and Occlusal Reconstruction, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Tokushima University, Tokushima, Japan.
Kanazawa University · JPKyushu University · JPShowa University · JPTokushima University · JPToyohashi Heart Center · JPUniversity of Fukui · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTherapy outcome measures (TOMs) in temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) have not been systematically evaluated. We systematically explored the main TOM assessment methods for TMD TOMs used in previous studies.

designScoping review. DATA SOURCES: According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Review reporting guidelines, we systematically searched five key databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Epistemonikos and ClinicalTrials) and thoroughly scanned relevant grey literature using Medical Subject Headings, Emtree and index terms. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We considered primary research papers published from January 2010 to December 2020 that included patients with TMD aged ≥18 years, diagnosed according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Four reviewers extracted general information and information on study design and setting, target, interventions, and outcome type.

resultsOne hundred and seventy-two of the 3726 screened articles (3704 by search engines and 22 manually) were included. The TOMs analysed included pain (n=161 articles), maximal mouth opening (MMO) (91), jaw function (32), jaw movement (26), joint sound (16), quality of life (QOL) (15), depression/anxiety (14), oral QOL (10) or others (30). Evaluation periods were <4 weeks (111), <8 weeks (62), <12 weeks (59), >12 weeks (75) or 'not mentioned' (12). Pain outcomes (229) included general pain (115), tenderness (45), pain during functioning (44), resting pain (16) and others (8). Pain outcome evaluation methods included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 121), Numerical Rating Scale (21) and other methods (21). Pain outcome indicators were binary (10) or continuous (158); only five studies reported the least significant difference in treatment efficacy. MMO evaluation using painless methods (19) and jaw function evaluation using methods assessing mandibular movement range (23) were the most frequent.

conclusionsTMD TOMs are diverse; the major outcomes were pain, MMO, jaw function and jaw movement. Most pain outcomes are evaluated by VAS Score changes.

Indexed as

Temporomandibular Joint DisordersAdolescentAdultHumansPainPain MeasurementQuality of LifeTreatment Outcomeepidemiologyoral & maxillofacial surgeryoral medicine

Identifiers

PMID35985779
PMCPMC9396127
OpenAlexW4292380333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.