MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157910774 · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00240-3

Randomized controlled trial of botulinum toxin A for chronic myogenous orofacial pain

2002· article· en· W2157910774 on OpenAlexafffund
Donald R. Nixdorf, Giseon Heo, Paul W. Major

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of California, San FranciscoUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsPalpationMedicinePlaceboTendernessVisual analogue scaleBotulinum toxinCrossover studyRandomized controlled trialMasseter muscleStatistical significanceAnesthesiaPopulationmyalgiaPhysical therapySurgeryDentistryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine whether botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) was efficacious for the treatment of chronic moderate to severe jaw muscle pain in females. This was a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of BTX-A. Twenty five units injected into each temporalis muscle and 50 U injected into each masseter muscle using three sites per muscle with 0.2 cm(3) per site. Data were collected at baseline, 8, 16, 24 weeks, with crossover occurring at 16 weeks. Primary outcome variables were pain intensity and unpleasantness, measured by horizontal visual analog scale (VAS). Secondary outcome variables were maximum interincisal opening without and irrespective of pain, muscle palpation tenderness (12 points), and four general questions. Fifteen female patients were enrolled (18-45 years), but only ten completed the trial. Of those who finished, no statistically significant difference was found in pain intensity (P=0.10), unpleasantness (P=0.40), palpation muscle tenderness (P=0.91), or the three general questions (P=0.64, P=0.66, P=0.67). Statistical significance was achieved for maximum opening without pain (P=0.02) and irrespective of pain (P=0.005) with the BTX-A arm having a relative decreased opening. No statistically significant difference was observed in any outcome measures except maximum opening, which showed BTX-A patient opening less wide than placebo. The results do not support the use of BTX-A in the treatment of moderate to severe jaw muscle pain in this patient population.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations133
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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