Impairment, Disability, and Satisfaction Outcomes After Lower-Extremity Botulinum Toxin A Injections for Children with Cerebral Palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to document impairment, disability, and parent satisfaction outcomes for children with cerebral palsy who received botulinum toxin A (BtA) injections. METHODS: Seven children, three to 11 years old, participated in this multiple single-subject AB design study. Impairment, disability, and satisfaction outcomes were documented using passive range of motion measurements, Modified Ashworth Scale scores, and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. These outcomes were measured every two weeks during the two-month baseline phase and the four-month intervention phase. Outcomes for each child were graphed and visually analyzed for changes in level, trend, and slope. RESULTS: After BtA injections, all children demonstrated an increase in passive range of motion and a decrease in spasticity in at least some of the injected muscles. Six of the seven children demonstrated improvements in disability and parent satisfaction outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in a variety of outcomes may be observed after BtA injections in children with cerebral palsy and lower-extremity spasticity who are ambulatory.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".