Patient-Reported Outcomes of Bimatoprost for Eyelash Growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypotrichosis of the eyelashes may negatively influence an individual's self-perception and appearance. Assessing the impact of treatment from a patient's perspective may be particularly relevant in trials of aesthetic agents. Once-daily dermal (topically applied) administration of bimatoprost ophthalmic solution 0.03% has been associated with increased eyelash prominence (ie, length, thickness, darkness). OBJECTIVES: The authors assess patient-reported outcomes (PRO) after treatment with bimatoprost for hypotrichosis of the eyelashes. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-masked, randomized, vehicle-controlled, parallel clinical trial, 4 PRO questionnaires were distributed to 278 patients (bimatoprost [n = 137] and vehicle [n = 141]). The primary PRO questionnaire was the 23-item Eyelash Satisfaction Questionnaire (ESQ), which measured satisfaction in 3 domains: length, fullness, and overall satisfaction (LFOS); confidence, attractiveness, and professionalism (CAP); and impact on daily routine (DR). RESULTS: By week 16, the bimatoprost group reported significantly greater improvements from baseline on all ESQ items (P ≤ .0433). These improvements were sustained through the 4-week posttreatment study visit. Patient satisfaction was significantly greater in the bimatoprost group than in the vehicle group for all 3 domains: LFOS (weeks 8-20; P ≤ .0052), CAP (weeks 12-20; P < .0001), and DR (weeks 16 and 20; P ≤ .01). CONCLUSIONS: The bimatoprost group reported significantly greater levels of positive patient outcomes and satisfaction than the vehicle group across all 23 questions and all 3 domains of the primary PRO questionnaire. These results support the effectiveness, as measured by objective measures and PRO, of once-daily bimatoprost ophthalmic solution 0.03% at producing more prominent eyelashes in adults.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".