Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42572026›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2026

A machine learning approach to predict treatment response in myofascial pain patients receiving masseter trigger point injections.

Alshaimaa Ahmed Shabaan, Islam Kassem, Aliaa Ibrahium Mahrous, Inass Aboulmagd, Islam A Amer, Ahmed Shaaban, Kareem Kamal Fathy, Reham Ragab, Mohamed Abd-El-Ghafour, Sally Ibrahim and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Alshaimaa Ahmed ShabaanOral & Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt. aas16@fayoum.edu.eg.
Islam KassemConsultant Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Maxillofacial surgery, Alamin Hospital, Ministry of Health & Population, Alamin, Egypt.
Aliaa Ibrahium MahrousFixed prosthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt.
Inass AboulmagdOral & Maxillofacial Radiology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt.
Islam A AmerDepartment of maxillofacial head and neck surgery, faculty of medicine, Sohage University, Sohage, Egypt.
Ahmed ShaabanProsthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Future University, Cairo, Egypt.
Kareem Kamal FathyNile University, Cairo, Egypt.
Reham RagabResearch Associate Nile of Hope hospital, Alexandria, Egypt.
Mohamed Abd-El-GhafourDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Sally IbrahimOral & Maxillofacial Pathology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt.
Shaimaa Mohsen RefaheeOral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrigger point injection (TPI) therapy is widely used for masseter myofascial pain syndrome (MPS), yet outcomes vary substantially. Individualized prediction tools are lacking, often leading to trial-and-error treatment selection.

objectiveTo develop, externally validate, and generalize ensemble machine learning models for predicting composite treatment success following masseter TPI, and to deploy a web-based clinical decision support system (CDSS).

methodsThis multicenter study included 1,181 patients with DC/TMD‑diagnosed masseter MPS treated with one of six injectable modalities. Baseline variables included pain (VAS), maximum mouth opening (MMO), and oral health‑related quality of life (OHIP-14). Composite treatment success was defined as simultaneous clinically meaningful improvement at 3 months: VAS reduction ≥ 2 points, MMO increase ≥ 5 mm, and OHIP-14 reduction ≥ 5 points. Random Forest (RF) and XGBoost models were trained on an internal cohort and externally validated on a geographically independent cohort. Performance was assessed using ROC‑AUC, precision‑recall AUC (PR‑AUC), calibration, decision curve analysis (DCA), and SHAP interpretability.

resultsOverall composite success rate was 43.1%. Internal validation ROC‑AUC was 0.914 (RF) and 0.888 (XGBoost); external validation ROC‑AUC was 0.771 and 0.787, respectively. External PR‑AUC values were 0.759 (RF) and 0.761 (XGBoost). Both models showed good calibration and positive net benefit on DCA across clinically relevant thresholds. SHAP analysis identified baseline MMO, OHIP-14, age, pain intensity, and injectable modality as the most influential predictors, with consistent rankings across models and cohorts. The validated XGBoost model was deployed as a web‑based CDSS.

conclusionsMachine learning models demonstrated good ability to predict multidimensional treatment success following masseter TPI. Baseline MMO, OHIP-14, age, pain intensity, and injectable modality were the strongest outcome determinants. External validation, SHAP interpretability, and DCA support model robustness and potential clinical utility for personalized treatment planning in MPS. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This tool may support treatment selection, reduce ineffective interventions, and improve patient outcomes in myofascial pain management.

Indexed as

Machine LearningMasseter MuscleMyofascial Pain SyndromesAdultBoosting Machine Learning AlgorithmsClassification AlgorithmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPrediction AlgorithmsPredictive Learning ModelsQuality of LifeRandom ForestTreatment OutcomeMachine learningMyofascial pain syndromeOrofacial painPrecision medicineRandom forestTrigger point injectionXGBoost

Identifiers

PMID42572026
PMCPMC13455472

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.