Facilitation of physiotherapy for patients suffering from myalgia using botulinum toxin type-A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effectiveness of Botulinum Toxin Type-A (BTX-A) injections was compared with lidocaine injections for the management of head and neck myofascial pain. Following injection, eighteen female subjects performed daily exercises and received a multi-week course of physical therapy. Recall appointments occurred at 4, 8, and 12 weeks. A significant reduction in VAS pain intensity scores was noted in both groups (BTX-A 43.9% decrease, lidocaine 51.6%), but there was no difference between groups. BTX-A subjects reported decreases across all sub-categories of the McGill Pain Questionnaire and one Pain Disability Index sub-category. No differences were noted between groups in muscle tenderness scores, compliance with home exercises, or amounts of analgesics required. BTX-A subjects reported more adverse events. Trigger point injections followed by physiotherapy appear to be effective in reducing pain intensity scores for head and neck myofascial pain. BTX-A may have added benefits in modulating qualitative aspects of the pain experience.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".