Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study will evaluate the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of a Masseter Muscle Prominence Scale for evaluating a patient's muscle prominence and a Lower Shape Classification for evaluating a patient's lower facial shape.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| All Participants | Healthy volunteers. No treatment (intervention) was administered. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No Intervention | Other | No treatment (intervention) was administered. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Inter-rater Reliability Using a Masseter Muscle Prominence Scale (MMPS) | The MMPS is an ordinal tool to assess the masseter muscle prominence (jaw muscle) for each side of the face from 1=minimal to 5=very marked. Inter-rater (among raters) reliability was calculated separately for the left and right side of the face using Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall's W). Kendall W statistics overall for the left and right sides of the face were derived using the average of assessment 1 and assessment 2 rounded to the nearest whole integer for each subject and each clinician. A total of 8 physicians rated each subject. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kendall's W was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kendall's W is provided. | Day 1 |
| Intra-rater Reliability Using a MMPS | The MMPS is an ordinal tool to assess the masseter muscle prominence (jaw muscle) for each side of the face from 1 = minimal to 5 = very marked. Intra-rater (within raters) reliability was calculated separately for the left and right side of the face using weighted Kappa statistics. Weighted Kappa statistics were calculated for each of the 8 physician raters. The overall intra-rater agreement for Kappa statistics for all raters combined was estimated by pooling Kappa statistics for each rater using a chi-square statistic. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kappa statistics was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kappa statistics is provided. | Day 1 |
| Inter-rater Reliability Using a Lower Facial Shape Classification (LFSC) | The LFSC is a qualitative tool to assess facial shape into one of 5 categories (A, B, C, D, and E). Inter-rater (among raters) reliability was calculated using Kappa statistics. Kappa statistics were calculated for each of the 5 facial categories. A total of 8 physicians rated each subject. The overall inter-rater agreement for Kappa statistics for all categories combined was estimated by pooling Kappa statistics for each category using a chi-square statistic. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kappa statistics was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kappa statistics is provided. |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
-sufficient visual acuity without the use of glasses or with contact lenses to self-assess lower facial shape in a mirror
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Healthy Volunteers
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Medical Director | Allergan | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newport Beach | California | United States |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | All Participants | Healthy volunteers. No treatment (intervention) was administered. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | All Participants | Healthy volunteers. No treatment (intervention) was administered. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Inter-rater Reliability Using a Masseter Muscle Prominence Scale (MMPS) | The MMPS is an ordinal tool to assess the masseter muscle prominence (jaw muscle) for each side of the face from 1=minimal to 5=very marked. Inter-rater (among raters) reliability was calculated separately for the left and right side of the face using Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall's W). Kendall W statistics overall for the left and right sides of the face were derived using the average of assessment 1 and assessment 2 rounded to the nearest whole integer for each subject and each clinician. A total of 8 physicians rated each subject. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kendall's W was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kendall's W is provided. | Reliability population: all subjects with at least assessment 1 performed by at least 1 in-person rater on day 1 | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Kendall's W | Day 1 |
|
Adverse events (AEs) were collected during the study period (Screening to Day 1).
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | All Participants | Healthy volunteers. No treatment (intervention) was administered. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Therapeutic Area Head, | Allergan, Inc | 714-246-4500 | clinicaltrials@allergan.com |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Day 1 |
| Intra-rater Reliability Using a LFSC | The LFSC is a qualitative tool to assess facial shape into one of 5 categories (A, B, C, D, and E). Intra-rater (within raters) reliability was calculated using Kappa statistics. Kappa statistics were calculated for each of the 8 physician raters. The overall intra-rater agreement for Kappa statistics for all raters combined was estimated by pooling Kappa statistics for each rater using a chi-square statistic. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kappa statistics was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kappa statistics is provided. | Day 1 |
| Years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Description |
|---|
| OG000 | All Participants | Healthy volunteers. No treatment (intervention) was administered. |
|
|
| Primary | Intra-rater Reliability Using a MMPS | The MMPS is an ordinal tool to assess the masseter muscle prominence (jaw muscle) for each side of the face from 1 = minimal to 5 = very marked. Intra-rater (within raters) reliability was calculated separately for the left and right side of the face using weighted Kappa statistics. Weighted Kappa statistics were calculated for each of the 8 physician raters. The overall intra-rater agreement for Kappa statistics for all raters combined was estimated by pooling Kappa statistics for each rater using a chi-square statistic. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kappa statistics was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kappa statistics is provided. | Reliability population: all subjects with at least assessment 1 performed by at least 1 in-person rater on day 1 | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Kappa statistics | Day 1 |
|
|
|
| Primary | Inter-rater Reliability Using a Lower Facial Shape Classification (LFSC) | The LFSC is a qualitative tool to assess facial shape into one of 5 categories (A, B, C, D, and E). Inter-rater (among raters) reliability was calculated using Kappa statistics. Kappa statistics were calculated for each of the 5 facial categories. A total of 8 physicians rated each subject. The overall inter-rater agreement for Kappa statistics for all categories combined was estimated by pooling Kappa statistics for each category using a chi-square statistic. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kappa statistics was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kappa statistics is provided. | Reliability population: all subjects with at least assessment 1 performed by at least 1 in-person rater on day 1 | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Kappa Statistics | Day 1 |
|
|
|
| Primary | Intra-rater Reliability Using a LFSC | The LFSC is a qualitative tool to assess facial shape into one of 5 categories (A, B, C, D, and E). Intra-rater (within raters) reliability was calculated using Kappa statistics. Kappa statistics were calculated for each of the 8 physician raters. The overall intra-rater agreement for Kappa statistics for all raters combined was estimated by pooling Kappa statistics for each rater using a chi-square statistic. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kappa statistics was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: ≤0: poor, >0 to ≤0.2: slight, >0.2 to ≤0.4: fair, >0.4 to ≤0.6: moderate, >0.6 to ≤0.8: substantial, and >0.8 to ≤1.0: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kappa statistics is provided. | Reliability population: all subjects with at least assessment 1 performed by at least 1 in-person rater on day 1 | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Kappa statistics | Day 1 |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 201 |
| 0 |
| 201 |
A disclosure restriction on the PI is that the sponsor can review results communications prior to public release and can embargo communications regarding trial results for a period that is less than or equal to 90 days from the time submitted to the sponsor for review. The sponsor cannot require changes to the communication and cannot extend the embargo.