Exploring the Psychosocial Impact of Botulinum Toxin Type A Injections for Individuals With Oromandibular Dystonia: A Qualitative Study of Patients' Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore the psychosocial impact of botulinum toxin (BoNT) injections for oromandibular dystonia (OMD) and to gain a better understanding of how participants judge the success of this treatment. Method Eight individuals with OMD and dysarthria participated in one face-to-face, semistructured interview. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative, phenomenological methods of coding, immersion, and emergence were used in the analysis of interview data. Results Two major themes and six subthemes emerged from the analysis of interview data. The first theme, Botox has changed me and my experiences , explored the participants' perspective of receiving BoNT injections and its psychosocial impact. The second theme, What communication is like for me , explored the psychosocial impact of BoNT on speech production and participation. Conclusions Our results suggest that BoNT has a variable impact on domains related to quality of life, satisfaction with treatment, speech production, and communicative participation. This study adds novel information related to the psychosocial consequences of BoNT treatment in the management of OMD and builds on a literature that studies the consequences and experiences of living with OMD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".