MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971766459 · doi:10.3111/13696998.2014.925462

Satisfaction with botulinum toxin treatment in post-stroke spasticity: results from two cross-sectional surveys (patients and physicians)

2014· article· en· W1971766459 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Economics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpasticityBotulinum toxinStroke (engine)Cross-sectional studyPatient satisfactionPhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient and physician satisfaction with current standard-of-care botulinum toxin treatment regimens for symptom control in patients with post-stroke spasticity using structured interviews with patients and physicians. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Two cross-sectional surveys were conducted in Canada, France, Germany, and the US. The patient survey included patients with post-stroke spasticity who had undergone at least two botulinum toxin A injection cycles. Information on patients' current and prior botulinum toxin treatment cycles and quality of life was collected. The physician survey included physicians treating post-stroke spasticity with botulinum toxins and collected information regarding physician satisfaction with botulinum toxin treatment for post-stroke spasticity. RESULTS: Of 79 participating patients with post-stroke spasticity, 61 (77%) received treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA, 15 (19%) with abobotulinumtoxinA, and three (4%) with incobotulinumtoxinA. Overall, 40.5% of patients were very satisfied, 48.1% were somewhat satisfied, and 11.4% were not at all satisfied with botulinum toxin treatment. Patient satisfaction was lowest just before injection and highest at the time of peak effect. The mean injection interval was 13.7 (SD = 3.5) weeks; however, 43.4% of patients expressed a preference for intervals of ≤ 10 weeks. Most of the 105 participating physicians' were moderately (57.7%) or very (36.5%) satisfied with botulinum toxin treatment. However, physicians estimated that 16.2% of their patients with post-stroke spasticity could benefit from shorter injection intervals, and that 24.6% of patients could benefit from higher doses than those permitted by current country directives. STUDY LIMITATIONS: Patients' responses were based on subjective recollections and physicians' responses were based on general impressions. CONCLUSIONS: These surveys indicate that patients' and physicians' satisfaction with botulinum toxin therapy for post-stroke spasticity is overall very good. However, patients' satisfaction over the treatment cycle varied with onset, peak, and trough of treatment effects and patients and physicians expressed a need for treatment individualization.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it