MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155779686 · doi:10.1186/1745-6215-9-59

Study design and methods of the BoTULS trial: a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical effect and cost effectiveness of treating upper limb spasticity due to stroke with botulinum toxin type A

2008· article· en· W2155779686 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helen Rodgers, Lisa Shaw, Christopher Price, Frederike van Wijck, Michael Barnes, Laura A. Graham, Gary A. Ford, Phil Shackley, Nick Steen

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Technology Assessment ProgrammeNewcastle UniversityNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineSpasticityUpper limbPhysical therapyStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationRandomized controlled trialModified Ashworth scaleQuality of life (healthcare)Botulinum toxinActivities of daily livingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Following a stroke, 55-75% of patients experience upper limb problems in the longer term. Upper limb spasticity may cause pain, deformity and reduced function, affecting mood and independence. Botulinum toxin is used increasingly to treat focal spasticity, but its impact on upper limb function after stroke is unclear.The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of botulinum toxin type A plus an upper limb therapy programme in the treatment of post stroke upper limb spasticity. TRIAL DESIGN: A multi-centre open label parallel group randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with upper limb spasticity at the shoulder, elbow, wrist or hand and reduced upper limb function due to stroke more than 1 month previously. INTERVENTIONS: Botulinum toxin type A plus upper limb therapy (intervention group) or upper limb therapy alone (control group). OUTCOMES: Outcome assessments are undertaken at 1, 3 and 12 months. The primary outcome is upper limb function one month after study entry measured by the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT). Secondary outcomes include: spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale); grip strength; dexterity (Nine Hole Peg Test); disability (Barthel Activities of Daily Living Index); quality of life (Stroke Impact Scale, Euroqol EQ-5D) and attainment of patient-selected goals (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure). Health and social services resource use, adverse events, use of other antispasticity treatments and patient views on the treatment will be compared. PARTICIPANTS are clinically reassessed at 3, 6 and 9 months to determine the need for repeat botulinum toxin type A and/or therapy.Randomisation : A web based central independent randomisation service. Blinding: Outcome assessments are undertaken by an assessor who is blinded to the randomisation group. SAMPLE SIZE: 332 participants provide 80% power to detect a 15% difference in treatment successes between intervention and control groups. Treatment success is defined as improvement of 3 points for those with a baseline ARAT of 0-3 and 6 points for those with ARAT of 4-56. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN78533119 Eudra CT 2004-002427-40 CTA 17136/0230/001 FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment Programme. Ipsen Ltd provide botulinum toxin type A (Dysport(R)).

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 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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.297 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207