Effectiveness and Safety of Botulinum Toxin Type A in Children with Musculoskeletal Conditions: What Is the Current State of Evidence?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with musculoskeletal conditions experience muscle weakness, difficulty walking and limitations in physical activities. Standard treatment includes physiotherapy, casting, and surgery. The use of botulinum toxins appears as a promising treatment on its own, but usually as an adjunct to other treatment modalities and as an alternative to surgery. The objectives were to establish the evidence on the effectiveness, safety and functional outcome of BTX-A in children with musculoskeletal conditions. A literature search using five electronic databases identified 24 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Two randomized clinical trials were included; most studies were case studies with small sample sizes and no control group. Improvements in gait pattern, function, range of motion, reduction of co-contractions, and avoidance of surgical procedures were found following BTX-A injections. Adverse events were not reported in 10 studies, minor adverse events were reported in 13 children and there were no severe adverse events. Additional doses appear safe. BTX-A is a promising treatment adjunct in improving functional outcomes in children with musculoskeletal conditions. Future studies including larger samples, longer follow-up periods and a comparison group are required to provide evidence on the effectiveness and safety of this drug in children with musculoskeletal conditions.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it