Botulinum toxin a for adolescents with persisting post-concussion headaches: a case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To present safety and tolerability of treating persistent post-concussive headaches with botulinum toxin A (Botox) in adolescents. Design Retrospective case series. Setting A tertiary rehabilitation hospital interdisciplinary outpatient concussion clinic for adolescents aged 12–18 years. Participants Seven patients ages 15–18 with persistent post-concussion headaches. Interventions 1. Comprehensive assessment by an interdisciplinary rehab team. 2. Establishing the diagnosis of chronic daily headache disorder with 15 headaches per month, 8 of them meeting pediatric migraine criteria. Headache treatment included neck exercises, physiotherapy, CBT, mindfulness, oral prophylactic and abortive migraine medications as well as Botox. Patients selected had prolonged debilitating headaches, had failed other treatment options, and/or had specific circumstances precluding use of other treatment options, were unable to attend school, tolerate daily activities. 3. Discussion of potential side effects of Botox, complications of injection, review of current literature evidence. Verbal consent obtained. Clinical monitoring of adverse events of injection, side effects of Botox, effect on daily activities and headaches. Main results There were no adverse events related to the injection of Botox. Some patients experienced a transient flare up of headaches after injection. All patients reported that injections and post-injection side effects were tolerable. Reduction in headaches was variable. Conclusions Based on this small clinical sample of adolescents with severe persistent post-concussion headaches, Botox appears to be a well-tolerated and safe treatment option. Prospective, RCT studies are required to confirm this preliminary clinical impression. Competing interests None.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".