MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157956716 · doi:10.1007/s00115-021-01120-1

Behandlungszufriedenheit bei Patienten mit zervikaler Dystonie

2021· article· de· W3157956716 on OpenAlex
Chi Wang Ip, Axel Schramm, Pascal Maisonobe, Emma Zaragatski, Thomas Sycha

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDer Nervenarzt · 2021
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Even though treatment guidelines recommend botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) as first line treatment for primary cervical dystonia (CD), there are only limited data on how BoNT-A-injections are administered in routine clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: This subgroup analysis evaluated patient satisfaction and symptom control under consideration of BoNT‑A treatment modalities in German and Austrian CD patients (DE/AT, n = 79) compared to the full international cohort (n = 995). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The INTEREST-IN-CD2 was a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational study. Course of treatment in adult primary CD patients under BoNT‑A treatment was assessed over a time period of 3 years. Primary outcome measure was the long-term satisfaction of patients with treatment, measured as maximum satisfaction between two consecutive injections as well as satisfaction at the time of reinjection. RESULTS: Treatment satisfaction at the maximum effect was stable and comparably good in both populations during the study (82.3-92.7% and 85.0-89.9%). Satisfaction decreased with decreasing BoNT‑A effect at the end of the treatment interval: it was comparable at the start of the study in both groups (54.2% vs. 51.4%), decreased numerically in the DE/AT group to 32.7% but remained stable in the total population. Analysis of Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) and Tsui scores did not reveal any substantial differences between the DE/AT subgroup and total cohort. CONCLUSION: Overall, the study confirmed good clinical symptom control by BoNT‑A. The numerical differences in the current satisfaction seen in the comparison of DE/AT to the total cohort are possibly due to different proportions of BoNT‑A naïve patients in both groups, as they expressed different levels of satisfaction than previously treated patients.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.006

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.236 · 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