MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075489715 · doi:10.1080/14764170701411470

The evolution of botulinum neurotoxin type A for cosmetic applications

2007· review· en· W2075489715 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Carruthers, Alastair Carruthers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAllergan
KeywordsMedicineHyperhidrosisBotulinum neurotoxinClostridium botulinumBotulinum toxinDermatologyNeurotoxinSurgeryInternal medicineMicrobiologyToxinBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Very few pharmaceutical preparations share an evolutionary history as remarkable as that of botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT). The exotoxin of the organism Clostridium botulinum, once feared as a terrible poison, has been reborn as a highly regarded and widely used therapeutic and aesthetic agent. In less than two decades since the report of the success of BoNT type A (BoNTA) in reducing glabellar lines, injection of this product has become the most common non-surgical cosmetic procedure performed in the USA and worldwide. In addition to temporarily eliminating rhytids by muscle weakening, other dermatologic applications of BoNTA include correcting facial asymmetries and treating hyperhidrosis. Although BOTOX is the most clinically substantiated and published of the BoNTA preparations, other BoNTA products, as well as a BoNT type B product, are available in some parts of the world, and others are in development.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations52
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmetic and Laser TherapySame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207