Botulinum toxin type B vs. type A in toxin‐naïve patients with cervical dystonia: Randomized, double‐blind, noninferiority trial
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
The objective of this study was to compare efficacy, safety, and duration of botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) and type B (BoNT-B) in toxin-naïve cervical dystonia (CD) subjects. BoNT-naïve CD subjects were randomized to BoNT-A or BoNT-B and evaluated in a double-blind trial at baseline and every 4-weeks following one treatment. The primary measure was the change in Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) from baseline to week 4 post-injection. Secondary measures included change in TWSTRS-subscale scores, pain, global impressions, and duration of response and safety assessments. The study was designed as a noninferiority trial of BoNT-B to BoNT-A. 111 subjects were randomized (55 BoNT-A; 56 BoNT-B). Improvement in TWSTRS-total scores 4 weeks after BoNT-B was noninferior to BoNT-A (adjusted means 11.0 (SE 1.2) and 8.8 (SE 1.2), respectively; per-protocol-population (PPP)). The median duration of effect of BoNT-A and BoNT-B was not different (13.1 vs. 13.7 weeks, respectively; P-value = 0.833; PPP). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of injection site pain and dysphagia. Mild dry mouth was more frequent with BoNT-B but there were no differences for moderate/severe dry mouth. In this study, both BoNT-A and B were shown to be effective and safe for the treatment of toxin-naive CD subjects.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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