On defining bruxism

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In a series of recent publications, orofacial researchers have debated the question of how ‘bruxism’ should be defined for the purposes of accurate diagnosis and reliable clinical research. Following the principles of realism-based ontology, we performed an analysis of the arguments involved. This revealed that the disagreements rested primarily on inconsistent use of terms, so that issues of ontology were thus obfuscated by shortfalls in terminology. In this paper, we demonstrate how bruxism terminology can be improved by paying attention to the relationships between (1) particulars and types, and (2) continuants and occurrents.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-08-30
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Building Ontologies with Basic Formal Ontology.Arp, Robert; Smith, Barry & Spear, Andrew D.
Toward an Ontological Treatment of Disease and Diagnosis.Scheuermann, Richard H.; Ceusters, Werner & Smith, Barry
The Ontology-Epistemology Divide: A Case Study in Medical Terminology.Bodenreider, OIivier; Smith, Barry & Burgun, Anita

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
76 ( #37,212 of 50,260 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
12 ( #37,870 of 50,260 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.