Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38431574›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2024

Accuracy of temporomandibular disorders diagnosis evaluated through the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorder (DC/TDM) Axis II compared to the Axis I evaluations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Giuseppe Minervini, Maria Maddalena Marrapodi, Yuliia Siurkel, Marco Cicciù, Vincenzo Ronsivalle

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Defining Effect Size Standards in Temporomandibular Joint and Masticatory Muscle Research.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  10. [Development and validation of a clinical automatic diagnosis system based on diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
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

5 authors.

Giuseppe MinerviniSaveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences (SIMATS), Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Maria Maddalena MarrapodiDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialist Surgery, University of Campania, Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, 80121, Italy. mariamaddalena.marrapodi@studenti.unicampania.it.
Yuliia SiurkelInternational European University School of Medicine, Akademika Hlushkova Ave, 42В, Kyiv, 03187, Ukraine. yuliasiurkel@ieu.edu.ua.
Marco CicciùDepartment of Biomedical and Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Catania University, Catania, 95123, Italy.
Vincenzo RonsivalleDepartment of Biomedical and Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Catania University, Catania, 95123, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe temporomandibular joint (TMJ) is a complex joint that facilitates mandibular movements during speech, chewing, and swallowing activities. The Axis I evaluation of the DC/TMD focuses on assessing physical diagnoses related to TMDs. It includes an assessment of pain and functional limitations, such as jaw opening range, joint sounds, and joint tenderness. The Axis II evaluation of the DC/TMD provides information on the patient's psychological status and quality of life. This Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis aimed to evaluate the accuracy of Temporomandibular Disorders diagnosis considered through the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorder (DC/TDM) axis II compared to the Axis I evaluations.

methodsA search was made in PubMed, Web of Science and Lilacs for articles published from the inception until 20 January 2023. We applied the Population, Exposure, Comparator, and Outcomes (PECO) model [1] to assess document eligibility. Only studies that evaluated patients by DC/TMD Axis I and Axis II were considered. Review Manager version 5.2.8 (Cochrane Collaboration) was used for the pooled analysis. We measured the odds ratio (OR) between the two groups (Axis I and Axis II).

resultsFifty-one articles were selected because of the search. Four papers were excluded before the screening: 2 pieces were not in English, and two were reviewed. The remaining 47 articles were selected for the title and abstract screening to evaluate whether they met the PECO criteria. Among these, four papers were established; the overall effect showed that there was no difference in TMD diagnosis between Axis I and Axis II (RR 1.17; 95% CI: 0.80- 1.71; Z:0.82; P = .41), suggesting that there is no difference between Axis I and Axis II.

conclusionIn conclusion, DC/TMD is an effective tool for the diagnosis of TMD. It improves the accuracy of TMD diagnosis, allows for the classification of subtypes, and assesses psychosocial factors that may impact the development or maintenance of TMD symptoms.

Indexed as

Facial PainTemporomandibular Joint DisordersHumansMandibleQuality of LifeTemporomandibular JointAxis IAxis IIDC/TMDTemporomandibular disorders

Identifiers

PMID38431574
PMCPMC10909276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.