MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Botulinum toxin for masseter hypertrophy

2009· reference-entry· en· W4249692592 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed A Al-Muharraqi, Zbys Fedorowicz, Jaffer Al Bareeq, Reem Al Bareeq, Mona Nasser

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2009
Typereference-entry
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMasseter muscleBotulinum toxinCochrane LibraryMuscle hypertrophyPlaceboRandomized controlled trialSurgeryInternal medicineDentistryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Benign masseter muscle hypertrophy is an uncommon clinical phenomenon of uncertain aetiology which is characterised by a soft swelling near the angle of the mandible. The swelling may on occasion be associated with facial pain and can be prominent enough to be considered cosmetically disfiguring. Varying degrees of success have been reported for some of the treatment options for masseter hypertrophy, which range from simple pharmacotherapy to more invasive surgical reduction. Injection of botulinum toxin type A into the masseter muscle is generally considered a less invasive modality and has been advocated for cosmetic sculpting of the lower face. Botulinum toxin type A is a powerful neurotoxin which is produced by the anaerobic organism Clostridium botulinum and when injected into a muscle causes interference with the neurotransmitter mechanism producing selective paralysis and subsequent atrophy of the muscle. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of botulinum toxin type A in the management of benign bilateral masseter hypertrophy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases in August 2008: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, issue 3); MEDLINE (via PubMed) (1950 to August 2008); EMBASE (via embase.com) (1980 to August 2008); and LILACS via BIREME. We searched two bibliographic databases of regional journals which may be expected to contain relevant trials (IndMED and Iranmedex) using free text terms appropriate for this review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing intra-masseteric injections of botulinum toxin versus placebo administered for cosmetic facial sculpting in individuals of any age with bilateral benign masseter hypertrophy, which had been self-evaluated and confirmed by clinical and radiological examination. We excluded participants with unilateral or compensatory contralateral masseter hypertrophy resulting from head and neck radiotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors conducted screening of studies in duplicate and independently, and although no eligible trials were identified, the two authors had planned to extract data independently and assess trial quality using standard Cochrane Collaboration methodologies. MAIN RESULTS: We retrieved 167 references to studies, none of which matched the inclusion criteria for this review and all of which were excluded. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify any randomised controlled trials on the efficacy of intra-masseteric injections of botulinum toxin for people with bilateral benign masseter hypertrophy. The absence of high level evidence for the effectiveness of this intervention emphasises the need for well-designed, adequately powered, randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207