MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Safety and Efficacy of Nonanimal Stabilized Hyaluronic Acid for Improvement of Mouth Corners

2006· article· en· W2114881114 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatologic Surgery · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHyaluronic acidPatient satisfactionSurgeryDentistryCosmetic Techniques

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Esthetic concern with downturned mouth corners ("mouth frown") is increasing in the aging baby-boomer generation. A new technique to offer structural support using the recently approved filler nonanimal stabilized hyaluronic acid (NASHA; Restylane, Q-med Inc., Uppsala, Sweden) is described. METHOD: Fifteen women with prominent downturned mouth corners met the inclusion criteria for the study. All were photographed before and at 1 week, 3 months, 4.5 months, and 6 months after treatment using a standardized clinical photographic system. NASHA was injected using a standardized technique with nerve block anesthesia to ensure patient comfort. RESULTS: All 15 women noted swelling, redness, and some local discomfort for several days after the injection. All noted an improvement in the downward angulation of their mouth corners at the first post-treatment visit, with at least partial improvement maintained through the 6-month post-treatment follow-up visit. CONCLUSIONS: NASHA injection to support the age-related downturn of lateral lip corners was effective, safe, and well tolerated in a small prospective study of middle-aged female subjects. Esthetic satisfaction was greatest in the first 3 months post-treatment, but 40% of subjects still noted improvement at the 6-month follow-up visit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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