Respecting upper facial anatomy for treating the glabella with neuromodulators to avoid medial brow ptosis—A refined 3‐point injection technique
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current injection algorithms for treating the glabella rely on a five- or seven-point injection technique with possible medial eyebrow ptosis and lateral eyebrow elevation as undesirable outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety profile of a refined 3-point injection technique targeting horizontal and vertical glabellar lines. METHODS: A total of n=105 patients (27 males and 78 females) with a mean age of 40.90 ± 9.2 years were investigated. The injection technique relied on targeting the muscular origin of the procerus and the corrugator supercilii muscles exclusively. The time of effect onset and the injection-related outcome 120 days after the treatment was evaluated using the 5-point glabellar line severity scale. RESULTS: The onset of the neuromodulator effect was on average 3.5 ± 1.5 days. There was no statistically significant difference in the amplitude of movement before or 14 days after the treatment with 2.99 ± 4.4 mm vs. 3.39 ± 3.6 mm (p = 0.149) for the medial head of the eyebrow and with 3.18 ± 4.7 mm vs. 3.33 ± 4.3 mm (p = 0.510) for the lateral head of the eyebrow, respectively. CONCLUSION: Incorporating anatomic concepts into clinical practice for glabellar frown line neuromodulator treatments with the investigated 3-point injection technique resulted in the absence of adverse events like eyebrow ptosis, upper eyelid ptosis, medial eyebrow ptosis, and lateral frontalis hyperactivity. This technique demonstrated efficacy throughout the 4-month study period.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it