1,721,026 research outputs found
Development and validation of classification criteria for idiopathic orofacial pain for use in population-based studies
No full textAim: To develop and validate a questionnaire-based tool which would enable classification of idiopathic orofacial pain in the general population. Methods: A postal questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey was made of 4,200 randomly selected adults who were registered with a general medical practice in North West England. The questionnaire collected information on a number of factors: demographics (age, gender), orofacial pain (duration, descriptors, site, pattern, intensity, disability, and consultation behavior), and comorbidities (reporting of other unexplained symptoms and psychosocial factors). Subjects reporting orofacial pain were interviewed by an examiner blinded to their exposure status and classified into 1 of 3 categories: (a) dentoalveolar, (b) musculoligamentouslsoft tissue, and (c) idiopathic orofacial pain. Results: A high adjusted response rate of 72% was achieved (crude response rate 60%). Of those who reported orofacial pain and were eligible for interview (n = 218), 197 (88%) were interviewed. Subjects classified by interview into the idiopathic category were more likely to report aching, nagging, and chronic pain pain at multiple sites. They were also more likely to report facial trauma and other chronic symptoms and to have consulted multiple health-care workers. Variables that most strongly predicted membership into the idiopathic category were female gender, nagging, aching pain which was worse when stressed, and topography (pain at multiple sites and unilateral pain). Conclusion: The classification criteria developed for idiopathic orofacial pain can be used as a screening tool for subjects with this condition in the general population
The epidemiology of chronic syndromes that are frequently unexplained: do they have common associated factors?
No full textBackground: syndromes for which no physical or pathological changes can be found tend to be researched and managed in isolation although hypotheses suggest that they may be one entity. The objectives of our study were to investigate the co-occurrence, in the general population, of syndromes that are frequently unexplained and to evaluate whether they have common associated factors. Methods: we conducted a population-based cross-sectional survey that included 2299 subjects who were registered with a General Medical Practice in North-west England and who completed full postal questionnaires (response rate 72%). The study investigated four chronic syndromes that are frequently unexplained: chronic widespread pain, chronic oro-facial pain, irritable bowel syndrome, and chronic fatigue. Validated instruments were used to measure the occurrence of syndromes and to collect information on a variety of associated factors: demographic (age, gender), psychosocial (anxiety, depression, illness behaviour), life stressors, and reporting of somatic symptoms. Results: we found that 587 subjects (27%) reported one or more syndromes: 404 (18%) reported one, 134 (6%) reported two, 34 (2%) reported three, and 15 (1%) reported all four syndromes. The occurrence of multiple syndromes was greater than would be expected by chance (P < 0.001). There were factors that were common across syndromes: female gender [odds ratio (OR) = 1.8; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.5-2.2], high levels of aspects of health anxiety like health worry preoccupation (OR = 3.5; 95% CI 2.8-4.4) and reassurance seeking behaviour (OR = 1.4; 95% CI 1.1-1.7), reporting of other somatic symptoms (OR = 3.6; 95% CI 2.9-4.4), and reporting of recent adverse life events (OR = 2.3; 95% CI 1.9-2.8). Conclusion: this study has shown that chronic syndromes that are frequently unexplained co-occur in the general population and share common associated factors. Primary care practitioners need to be aware of these characteristics so that management is appropriate at the outset.</p
Are reports of mechanical dysfunction in chronic oro-facial pain related to somatisation? A population based study
No full textObjectives: (i)To examine the association between self-reported mechanical factors and chronic oro-facial pain.(ii)To test the hypothesis that this relationship could be explained by (a) reporting of psychological factors (b) common association of self-reported mechanical factors with other unexplained syndromes. Methods: A population based cross-sectional study of 4200 randomly selected adults registered with a General Medical Practice in North West, England. The study examined the association of chronic oro-facial pain with a variety of self-reported mechanical factors: teeth grinding, facial trauma, missing teeth and the feeling that the teeth did not fit together properly. Information was also collected on demographic factors, psychological factors and the reporting of other frequently unexplained syndromes. Results: An adjusted response rate of 72% was achieved. Only two mechanical factors: teeth grinding (odds ratio (OR) 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-3.0) and facial trauma (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.3-2.9) were independently associated with chronic oro-facial pain after adjusting for psychological factors. However, these factors were also commonly associated with the reporting of other frequently unexplained syndromes: teeth grinding (odds ratio (OR) 1.8, 95% CI 1.5-2.2), facial trauma (OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.7-2.6). Conclusions: Self-reported mechanical factors associated with chronic oro-facial pain are confounded, in part, by psychological factors and are equally common across other frequently unexplained syndromes. They may represent another feature of somatisation. Therefore the use of extensive invasive therapy such as occlusal adjustments and surgery to change mechanical factors may not be justified in many cases. © 2007 European Federation of Chapters of the International Association for the Study of Pain
Risk factors for onset of chronic oro-facial pain - Results of the North Cheshire oro-facial pain prospective population study
No full textDue to the cross-sectional nature of previous studies, whether mechanical factors predict the onset of Chronic oro-facial pain remains unclear. Aims of the current study were to test the hypotheses that self-reported mechanical factors would predict onset of Chronic oro-facial pain and that any observed relationship would be independent of the confounding effects of psychosocial factors and reporting of other unexplained symptoms. About 1735 subjects who had completed a baseline questionnaire were assessed at 2 year follow-up for the presence of Chronic oro-facial pain, psychosocial factors (anxiety and depression, illness behaviour, life stressors and reporting of somatic symptoms), mechanical dysfunction (facial trauma, grinding, phantom bite and missing teeth) and reporting of other unexplained symptoms (chronic widespread pain, irritable bowel syndrome and chronic fatigue). About 1329 subjects returned completed questionnaires (adjusted response rate 87%). About 56 (5%) reported new episodes of Chronic oro-facial pain at follow-up. Univariate analyses showed that age, gender, reporting of other unexplained symptoms, psychosocial factors and two self-report mechanical factors predicted the onset of Chronic oro-facial pain. However multivariate analysis showed that mechanical factors did not independently predict onset. The strongest predictors were health anxiety (Relative Risk (RR) 2.8, 95% CI 1.3-6.2), chronic widespread pain (RR 4.0 95% C.I. 2.2-7.4) and age (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.7). The findings from this prospective study support the hypothesis that psychosocial factors are markers for onset of Chronic oro-facial pain. The efficacy of early psychological management of Chronic oro-facial pain to address these factors should be a priority for future investigations. © 2010 International Association for the Study of Pain
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
