ArticleDentistry journal2024
Randomized Clinical Trial of Electrostimulation Therapies as an Adjuvant for the Treatment of Temporomandibular Disorders.
Article in Dentistry journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnosis-based pathways for conservative and minimally invasive management of temporomandibular disorders: a scoping review.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2026Article
- Dental publications on the treatment of temporomandibular disorders: A bibliometric analysis.F1000Research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We carried out a comparison of the neuromuscular and clinical effects produced by electrostimulation therapies, as an adjuvant to the use of occlusal splints (removable muscle relaxation apparatus) in patients with temporomandibular disorders In this simple randomized clinical trial, 91 patients were randomly divided into three groups. Group A (GA) received transcutaneous electrostimulation therapy and an occlusal splint, Group B (GB) received percutaneous electrostimulation therapy and an occlusal splint, and Group C (GC) received an occlusal splint. The neuromuscular activity, as well as the signs and symptoms of each patient, were evaluated every week throughout the treatment (T0 = baseline; T1 = 7 days; T2 = 14 days; T3 = 21 days; T4 = 28 days; and T5 = 35 days). Pain was measured with a visual analog scale, and neuromuscular electrical activity was determined by the root mean square of the masseter muscles through the use of a UNAM-CINVESTAV 1.2 electromyograph. Comparisons were made using ANOVA for repeated measures (
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.