Injecting Botulinum Toxin at Different Depths Is Not Effective for the Correction of Eyebrow Asymmetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is theorized that brow elevation after treatment with botulinum toxin Type A (BoNT-A) results from inactivation of the brow depressors. Expert consensus is that increased injection depth delivers more BoNT-A to these depressors and causes increased elevation. This technique is applied to the correction of brow height asymmetry. OBJECTIVE: To compare changes in brow height after deep versus shallow BoNT-A in patients with brow asymmetry. METHODS: A prospective split-face analysis was performed on 23 women with eyebrow-height asymmetry. Subjects received 64 units of BoNT-A, divided among 16 injection sites in the glabella, forehead, and lateral canthal area. On the side where increased brow lift was desired, deep injections were performed and shallow injections on the opposite side. Photographs were taken at baseline and Week 4 for comparison measurements. RESULTS: All 23 women enrolled completed baseline injections and returned for the 4-week follow-up. There was no significant difference at 4 weeks in the change in brow height between the sides that received deep versus shallow BoNT-A injection. CONCLUSION: Because of the diffusion of the BoNT-A between muscle layers, the eyebrow depressor muscles cannot be accurately targeted with deep injection into the muscle belly for correction of eyebrow height discrepancies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".