MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521411122 · doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2016.07.462

Poster 289 Patient Registry of Spasticity Care World Data Analysis Based on Physician Experience

2016· article· en· W2521411122 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alberto Esquenazi, Stella Lee, Nathaniel H. Mayer, Allison Brashear, Gerard E. Francisco, Ellie Elovic Stuart A. Yablon, Roser Garreta, Jörg Wissel, Franco Molteni

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapySpasticityStroke (engine)Observational studyModified Ashworth scaleBody mass indexProspective cohort studyBotulinum toxinInternal medicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alberto Esquenazi: Research Grants - Allergan, Research Grants - IPSEN To report real-world treatment patterns in stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients treated with OnabotulinumtoxinA (onaBoNt), AbobotulinumtoxinA (aboBoNt), IncobotulinumtoxinA (incoBoNt) and phenol based on physician experience. Prospective, multicenter, observational registry design. Twenty-nine sites from: United States, Italy, Germany, Spain, Australia, Israel, Canada, Argentina and Mexico. 759 subjects with stroke or TBI, 17 More Experienced Physicians (MEP) and 12 Less Experienced Physicians (LEP). onaBoNt, aboBoNt, incoBoNt or phenol injection based on clinical need. Treatment administration characteristics during routine care, Ashworth, pain and goal attainment scale (GAS). 627 stroke and 132 TBI participants. Age, gender and body mass index (BMI) significantly differed per physician experience (P = <.0001; .03; .002, respectively). Mean botulinum toxin doses were statistically different with larger mean doses injected by MEP in the upper limb (UL) (59.9 ± 39.0, P = .0009). Mean doses injected by MEP in the lower limb (LL) were statistically larger (101.8 ± 69.2, P < .0001). Treated deformities significantly differed based on physician experience for UL and LL (P <.0001). Ashworth scores improved in both physician groups, however they were not significantly different across groups with the exception of the adducted thighs; equinovarus/equinus foot and thumb-in palm (P = .0395; P <.0001 and P =.0006, respectively). There was a statistically significant larger change in hand pain scores at follow up for LEP compared to MEP (P = .0102). Physician experience produced statistical significant differences on patients reported satisfaction towards their secondary goal with higher results for MEP (P = .0416). PROS World with its robust sample size, its international nature and the stratification based on physician experience provides clinical nuances of treatment that are not generally obtainable from other study designs. Level III

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207