Use of AbobotulinumtoxinA in Adults with Cervical Dystonia: A Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cervical dystonia (CD) is a neurological movement disorder characterized by sustained involuntary muscle contractions. First-line therapy for CD is intramuscular injections of botulinum neurotoxin (e.g., abobotulinumtoxinA) into the affected muscles. The objective of this systematic literature review is to assess the clinical evidence regarding the effects of abobotulinumtoxinA for treatment of CD in studies of safety, efficacy, patient-reported outcomes, and economic outcomes. Using comprehensive electronic medical literature databases, a search strategy was developed using a combination of Medical Subject Heading terms and keywords. Results were reviewed by two independent reviewers who rated the level of evidence. The search yielded 263 publications, of which 232 were excluded for being duplicate publications, not meeting the selection criteria, or failing to meet predefined eligibility criteria, leaving a total of 31 articles. Clinical efficacy, patient-reported outcomes, and safety data were in 6 placebo-controlled trials (8 articles), 6 active-controlled trials, and 16 observational studies (17 articles). Data on health economic outcomes were provided in one of the clinical trials, in two of the observational studies, and in one specific cost-analysis publication. This review demonstrated that the routine use of abobotulinumtoxinA in CD is well-established, effective, and generally well-tolerated, with a relatively low cost of treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".