ArticleDermatology practical & conceptual2026
Artificial Intelligence versus Human Assessment in the Treatment of Upper Facial Wrinkles with Abobotulinum Toxin A.
Article in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Aesthetic Outcomes Following Botulinum Toxin Treatment Using Multimodal Large Language Models: A Paired Before-and-After Analysis.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBotulinum toxin is widely used to treat upper facial wrinkles, and its efficacy is typically assessed through photographic comparisons and standardized scales. Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into aesthetic dermatology for objective wrinkle evaluation.
objectivesThis study aimed to compare human and AI-based assessments of pre- and posttreatment of upper facial wrinkles and evaluate their consistency and treatment effectiveness.
methodsA total of 228 individuals (204 females, 24 males) who received abobotulinum toxin for glabellar, forehead, and lateral canthal wrinkles were analyzed using pre- and posttreatment photographs. Wrinkles were assessed by four human raters using the 5-point Merz scale and Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS). AI evaluations were conducted using Haut. AI Face Skin Metrics 2.0, a pre-trained machine learning platform.
resultsAI had better error rates than humans for age prediction. The AI and human assessments showed high agreement for static and dynamic wrinkle evaluations (P<0.001). Posttreatment analysis indicated significant wrinkle reduction in both the human and AI assessments (P<0.001). Human assessment of GAIS scores was negatively correlated with wrinkle reduction (P<0.001). The treatment effects measured by AI and human raters showed a weak-to-moderate correlation.
conclusionAI-based assessments align well with human evaluations and can detect posttreatment improvements. However, the treatment effect did not correlate well with human evaluations. AI can serve as an objective tool for evaluating botulinum toxin treatment outcomes and complementing human assessments. However, there is still a need for a gold standard method to evaluate aesthetic improvement and harmony.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.