Determinants of responsiveness to botulinum toxin, casting, and bracing in the treatment of spastic equinus in children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The objective was to determine whether specific intrinsic (age, pattern of cerebral palsy [CP], child's motivation) and extrinsic (number of treatments, parenting stress) characteristics were associated with responsiveness to botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A) injections in children with CP 3 months after injection into the gastrocnemius muscle. METHOD: Children with hemiplegia or diplegia recruited from a BoNT-A programme were evaluated before and 3 months following injection of BoNT-A into the gastrocnemius. Outcome measures included muscle tone, range of motion, gait pattern, level of ambulation, gross motor function, and functional independence. Determinants of responsiveness to BoNT-A considered were age, number of treatments, distribution of CP, parenting stress, and motivation. RESULTS: Thirty-one children were recruited (17 males, 14 females)--22 with hemiplegia and nine with diplegia. Twenty-eight were classified at Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) level I and three at level III. The mean age was 6 years 4 months (SD 2y 11mo). Younger age (p=0.015) and fewer number (p=0.024) of BoNT-A treatments were associated with greater change in gross motor function. Child's motivation and parenting stress were significantly associated with improvements in muscle tone (p=0.006-0.017), passive range of motion (p=0.008-0.033), gait pattern (p=0.005-0.042), level of ambulation (p=0.001-0.043), and functional independence (p=0.004-0.027). INTERPRETATION: The results indicate that child, family, and treatment characteristics influence the degree of responsiveness to BoNT-A treatment. The contribution of contextual factors (personal and environmental) on responsiveness may be underappreciated in children with CP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".