Background The aetiology of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) has been widely discussed in literature, but little is known about patients’ self‐belief of their TMD aetiology. Objective For six categories of self‐believed aetiology of the TMD complaint (viz., occlusal factors, physical trauma, emotional stress, deep pain input, parafunctions and unknown), associations with physical, psychological and socio‐demographic predictors were assessed. Methods In this retrospective study, medical records of 328 TMD patients who had visited a clinic for Orofacial Pain and Dental Sleep Medicine were analysed. Results The most frequently reported self‐believed TMD aetiology was ‘unknown’ (42.3%). The category ‘occlusal factors’ was associated with pain worsening with emotion. ‘Physical trauma’ as self‐believed aetiology was associated with TMD dysfunction score. ‘Emotional stress’ was associated with awake bruxism and age 18‐49 years. ‘Deep pain input’ was associated with TMD dysfunction score, sleep bruxism, and arthritis or joint pain. ‘Parafunctions’ were associated with sleep bruxism. ‘Unknown’ was associated with TMD symptoms severity and work disability. Conclusion For each category of self‐believed aetiology of the TMD complaint, different associations with physical, psychological and socio‐demographic predictors were identified. This may suggest that individual phenotypes play a role in the patient's belief in the cause of the TMD complaint. Determination of phenotypic risk factors associated with aetiological self‐belief might help clinicians to provide better treatment, including counselling, to their patients.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shifted the contextual matters of education at all levels, for example, geographic location, community engagement in education and socioeconomic factors, to mention some contextual matters. Awareness of these matters stimulates critical reflections on the depth of preservice teachers’ pedagogical content and pedagogical knowledge. This paper examines preservice teachers’ pedagogical mobility in periods that rely on disruptive innovation. Preservice teachers’ placement settings changed rapidly because of COVID-19 regulations which impacted face-to-face and online teaching and learning environments. This investigation focused on professional learning under the ambit of teacher education, which up to now has been focused on face-to-face teaching pedagogies. The rapidly changing context has made the classroom the pedagogical anchor of education theory and practice. Using a reflective case study approach, we investigated (a) preservice teachers’ pedagogical challenges, (b) the meaning of pedagogical flexibility and innovative pedagogical mobility, and (c) the application of teacher performance and teaching standards in a teaching and learning environment affected by COVID-19. The critical self-reflective narratives offer insight into lived experiences and multiple contextual challenges that raise questions about well-prepared preservice teachers.

While gerotranscendence theories postulate that older adults tend to orient themselves toward solitude, activity theories highlight the importance of continuing social and meaningful engagement for well-being across lifespan. The distinction between loneliness and social isolation is particularly observable in older adults of advanced age who are often facing accelerated decline in physical and functional health, therefore restricting their opportunities to interact with others. This has been particularly disturbing during the previous two years under COVID. This study utilized data from the 2nd Hong Kong Centenarian Study which interviewed 120 family caregivers of older adults aged 95 or above in 2021–2022 when the city experienced almost an entire year of the outbreak. Using family or friend proxy information as well as caregiver ratings of whether older adults expressed feelings of social isolation and loneliness, we found that 10.7% of older adults reported high levels of loneliness and isolation; 26.7% feeling low in both; 11.5% were isolated but not lonely, and 38.2% were lonely but not isolated. Loneliness ratings were more strongly associated with psychological well-being (Patient Health Questionnaire-4), autonomy, happiness, perceived usefulness, worries, and death anxiety than did isolation, with the latter negatively correlated with optimism. Participants rated in the low isolation/loneliness group were least (death) anxious than the other three groups. Our findings underscore the divergence of isolation and loneliness for adults of advanced age and call for psychological support for oldest-old adults who continue to face social isolation, especially when society gradually recovers from COVID.