MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408043603 · doi:10.3389/dyst.2025.14297

Clinical response to placebo botulinum toxin injection in cervical dystonia—a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· article· en· W4408043603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emma L Wetmore, Henry Roberts, Alicia A. Livinski, Terance Camacho, Gina Norato, Mark Hallett, Mark Stacy

Bibliographic record

VenueDystonia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCervical dystoniaMeta-analysisBotulinum toxinMedicinePlaceboDystoniaAnesthesiaInternal medicinePathologyAlternative medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Cervical dystonia is the most common form of focal dystonia and is the most studied neurological condition in patients receiving botulinum toxin. In clinical trials of botulinum toxin, there is a placebo response, but this has not been studied systematically. Objectives A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess and compare the peak and duration of placebo response in people with cervical dystonia receiving botulinum toxin in randomized, blinded controlled clinical trials. Methods Three databases (Embase, PubMed, Scopus) and two trial registers (Cochrane CENTRAL and Cochrane Movement Disorders Trials Register) were searched by a biomedical librarian in May 2022 and September 2023. Covidence was used for screening titles and abstracts and full text. Two authors independently screened each record and collected data from the included articles. Microsoft Excel was used for data collection. The Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias tool in randomized trials was used by two authors for each included study. A third author resolved conflicts during screening and discrepancies during data collection and risk of bias assessment. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of the mean reduction in the TWSTRS total score at 4 weeks post injection, to assess the clinical change in the placebo arm overall and by TWSTRS pain, severity, and disability scales. Results Twelve studies, with moderate overall risk of bias, that included 2,145 participants with 580 randomized to placebo, were included in the systematic review. Clinical changes in the placebo arm were mild with a mean reduction of Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) total score of 3.5 [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.6–4.4] 4 weeks post injection. TWSTRS pain score at week four was 0.9 (95% CI: 0.6 - 1.1; I2 = 59%). TWSTRS severity score at week four was 1.7 (95% CI: 1.3–2.0; I2 = 63%). TWSTRS disability score at week four was 0.7 (95% CI: 0.3–1.0; I2 = 63%). Duration of benefit ranged from 45.1 to 76.3 days with a mean duration of 57.6 days. Dropouts in patients randomized to placebo were due to lack of efficacy, pain, neck weakness, fatigue, and tiredness. Conclusion This information on placebo response will be useful in estimating sample size and interpreting participant benefit in future interventional studies of cervical dystonia.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0270.042
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDystoniaSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207