MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-Group Study of OnabotulinumtoxinA and Hyaluronic Acid Dermal Fillers (24-mg/mL Smooth, Cohesive Gel) Alone and in Combination for Lower Facial Rejuvenation: Satisfaction and Patient-Reported Outcomes

2010· article· en· W1988912612 on OpenAlex
Jean Carruthers, Alastair Carruthers, Gary D. Monheit, Paula G. Davis

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatologic Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsQuest University CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePatient satisfactionRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyClinical trialHyaluronic acidSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important assessment benchmarks after aesthetic procedures. Systematic studies of PROs have not been conducted in the lower face. OBJECTIVE To study satisfaction and other PROs after treatment of the lower face with onabotulinumtoxinA and a 24-mg/mL smooth, cohesive hyaluronic acid (HA) gel filler, alone or in combination. METHODS Ninety female participants aged 35 to 55 were randomized to one of three groups: 24-mg/mL cohesive gel alone (n=30), onabotulinumtoxinA alone (n=30), or the combination (n=30). Effectiveness outcomes were investigator- and participant-rated satisfaction and the participant Self-Perception of Age (SPA) and participant-rated Look and Feel of the Lips and Mouth (LAF) questionnaires. Participants maintained a 14-day diary to record severity of treatment site responses. RESULTS All treatments resulted in significant improvements from baseline at all end points and on all PRO measures. For all measures and most time points, the 24-mg/mL cohesive gel treatment groups experienced greater improvements than onabotulinumtoxinA alone. Participant-rated severity of treatment-related reactions was mainly mild and transient. CONCLUSION OnabotulinumtoxinA and 24-mg/mL cohesive HA gel treatments, used alone or in combination for lower face rejuvenation, resulted in significant improvement in investigator- and participant-reported outcomes. The authors acknowledge statistical support from Ethica Clinical Research, Inc. (Montréal, Quebec, Canada). Drs. Alastair and Jean Carruthers are consultants and investigators and receive honoraria from Allergan, Inc. They are also consultants and investigators for Merz Pharmaceuticals and Solstice Neurosciences. Dr. Gary Monheit is a consultant and clinical investigator for Allergan, Galderma, Medicis, Merz Pharmaceuticals, and Revance Therapeutics. Funding for editorial support was provided by Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA. Writing and editorial assistance was provided by Paula G. Davis, PhD, of Health Learning Systems, Parsippany, NJ. The authors received research grant support from Allergan, Inc. for this study and for manuscript preparation.

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)0.002
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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.254 · 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