Determinants and status of quality of life after long‐term botulinum toxin therapy for cervical dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), using the Short Form Health Survey-36 (SF-36), in 70 cervical dystonia (CD) patients after long-term botulinum toxin (BTX) treatment (median 5.5 years), and to identify factors determining reduced HRQoL. We used combined patient-and physician-based measures to assess both CD severity [Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale, (TWSTRS)] and effect of long-term BTX treatment, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD) and General Health Questionnaire-30 to assess psychological distress. Mean SF-36 domain scores of the CD patients were reduced by <1 SD compared with age- and gender-matched population samples. High TWSTRS total scores and high HAD-depression (HAD-D) scores were the main factors associated with reduced scores in the physical and mental SF-36 domains, respectively. Patients evaluated to have a 'good effect' of long-term BTX treatment (n = 47), had significantly lower median TWSTRS total score, and a 3x lower frequency of high HAD-D scores, than those evaluated to an 'unsatisfactory effect' (n = 23). In conclusion, most CD patients enjoy a good HRQoL after long-term BTX therapy. Reduced HRQoL was associated with more severe disease and/or depressive symptoms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".