MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220888026 · doi:10.1111/jocd.14941

Botulinum toxin type A for preventing and treating cleft lip scarring—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2022· review· en· W4220888026 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qiang Ji, Jun Tang, Hua Hu, Junjie Chen, Ying Cen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmetic Dermatology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCleft Lip and Palate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScarsMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryRandomized controlled trialSurgeryBotulinum toxinInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) are congenital cleft facial deformities that are abnormal developments caused by errors in the fusion process of the embryo's face. Surgery is an important treatment, but postoperative scars will still cause psychological shadows to patients. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy of Botulinum toxin type A (BTXA) in preventing and treating postoperative CL/P scars and improving scar quality. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant trials. All relevant trials were performed before June 30, 2021. The data were entered into Revman 5.3 software, and a meta-analysis was conducted by using the random-effects model or fixed-effects model. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials involving 161 cases were included. Through quantitative analysis, BTXA showed significant differences in preventing and treating postoperative CL/P scars in terms of scar width (MD: -0.20; [95% CI, -0.30, -0.10], p < 0.0001) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (MD: 1.30; [95% CI, 1.06, 1.55], p < 0.0001), although no significant difference was noted on the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) (MD: -0.75; [95% CI, -1.68, 0.19], p = 0.12) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In preventing and treating postoperative CL/P scar hypertrophy, we found that BTXA injection can show better results. There was no statistically significant difference between the results after omitting Navarro's study or Chang's study because of the time of injection-before/during surgery or adult CL/P scars.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmetic DermatologySame topicCleft Lip and Palate ResearchFrench-language works237,207