A single-center dose-comparison study of botulinum neurotoxin type A in females with upper facial rhytids: assessing patients' perception of treatment outcomes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs). OBJECTIVES: To assess the PROs of treatment with botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNTA) in upper facial lines; to evaluate two new PRO instruments. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, double-blind study of 32 U, 64 U, or 96 U BoNTA divided among 16 sites. Measurements included the Facial Line Outcomes (FLO-11) Questionnaire version 1.0 and the Self-Perception of Age (SPA) measure version 2.0. RESULTS: Sixty females, mean age 42 +/- 8.7 years, were enrolled. Significant improvements (P<0.01) in mean FLO-11 scores occurred by week 2 for all groups and remained significant through week 16 for all groups except the 32-U group. Approximately 45-60% of the patients reported looking younger by a mean of 3.6-5.8 years. CONCLUSION: BoNTA treatment resulted in desired relaxed and younger appearance, as measured by the FLO-11 Questionnaire and the SPA measure.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".