ArticleJournal of oral rehabilitation2026
Occlusal Dysesthesia: Identifying Knowledge Gaps to Advance Clinical Care.
Article in Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2026. 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.
- Closing the Implementation Gap in Occlusal Dysesthesia (Phantom Bite Syndrome): From Knowledge Gaps to Prosthodontic Care Pathways.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOcclusal dysesthesia (OD) is a debilitating condition characterized by persistent occlusal discomfort in the absence of detectable occlusal abnormalities. Despite decades of clinical recognition, OD remains poorly understood, frequently misdiagnosed and inconsistently managed.
objectiveTo map the existing literature on OD, identify conceptual and mechanistic knowledge gaps, and outline research priorities to advance understanding and improve clinical care.
methodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. Seven electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, PsycInfo, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) were searched for English-language publications from 1976 to January 2026. Eligible sources included clinical studies, case reports/series, reviews, book chapters, and editorials addressing abnormal occlusal perception not attributable to structural pathology. Two reviewers independently screened records and full texts, with discrepancies resolved by consensus.
resultsForty-six articles were included. The literature was dominated by non-empirical reports. Most clinical research studies originated from Japan. Psychophysical studies did not demonstrate altered occlusal discrimination thresholds in individuals with OD, while psychological distress and depressive symptoms were consistently reported. Limited neuroimaging evidence suggested altered central processing, particularly involving prefrontal regions. No validated diagnostic criteria or standardized management strategies were identified.
conclusionAvailable evidence supports conceptualizing OD as a heterogeneous condition involving altered central processing and occlusal perception rather than a primary occlusal abnormality. Rigorous multidisciplinary and multimodal research integrating psychophysics, psychological assessment, and advanced neuroimaging is urgently needed to improve education and inform evidence-based diagnosis and management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.