↓ Skip to main content

A mixed treatment comparison to compare the efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin treatments for cervical dystonia

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
A mixed treatment comparison to compare the efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin treatments for cervical dystonia
Published in
Journal of Neurology, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00415-016-8050-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yi Han, Andrea L. Stevens, Khashayar Dashtipour, Robert A. Hauser, Zoltan Mari

Abstract

A systematic pair-wise comparison of all available botulinum toxin serotype A and B treatments for cervical dystonia (CD) was conducted, as direct head-to-head clinical trial comparisons are lacking. Five botulinum toxin products: Dysport(®) (abobotulinumtoxinA), Botox(®) (onabotulinumtoxinA), Xeomin(®) (incobotulinumtoxinA), Prosigne(®) (Chinese botulinum toxin serotype A) and Myobloc(®) (rimabotulinumtoxinB) have demonstrated efficacy for managing CD. A pair-wise efficacy and safety comparison was performed for all toxins based on literature-reported clinical outcomes. Multi-armed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified for inclusion using a systematic literature review, and assessed for comparability based on patient population and efficacy outcome measures. The Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) was selected as the efficacy outcome measurement for assessment. A mixed treatment comparison (MTC) was conducted using a Bayesian hierarchical model allowing indirect comparison of the interventions. Due to the limitation of available clinical data, this study only investigated the main effect of toxin treatments without explicitly considering potential confounding factors such as gender and formulation differences. There was reasonable agreement between the number of unconstrained data points, residual deviance and pair-wise results. This research suggests that all botulinum toxin serotype A and serotype B treatments were effective compared to placebo in treating CD, with the exception of Prosigne. Based on this MTC analysis, there is no significant efficacy difference between Dysport, Botox, Xeomin and Myobloc at week four post injection. Of the adverse events measured, neither dysphagia nor injection site pain was significantly greater in the treatment or placebo groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 17%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 11 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 12 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 March 2021.
All research outputs
#3,929,935
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#935
of 4,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,672
of 298,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#18
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.