MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2788292792 · doi:10.1136/vr.104167

Evidence of longer life; a cohort of 39 labrador retrievers

2018· article· en· W2788292792 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kellie Ceccarelli, Penny Watson, Stuart Carmichael, Johanna Penell, David Mark Morgan

Notice bibliographique

RevueVeterinary Record · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineVeterinary
ThématiqueVeterinary Medicine and Surgery
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBonferroni correctionDemographyMedicineAnalysis of varianceConfidence intervalLongevitySurvival analysisCohortLog-rank testCause of deathStatisticsGerontologyMathematicsSurgeryInternal medicineDisease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A panel of veterinary and academic experts reviewed current available evidence on age at death for labradors and reached a consensus that their average/typical life span was 12 years of age.1 A prospective cohort study that described the longevity of 39 pedigree adult neutered labradors, showed that 89.7 per cent lived to meet/exceed this typical life span. The study showed that maintenance of lean body mass and reduced accumulation of body fat were associated with attaining a longer than average life span while sex and age at neutering were not associated with longevity.1 Descriptive statistics are reported for age at death using median, minimum and maximum values. Median age at death was compared using Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance with post hoc Dunn's pairwise comparisons. After excluding 32 KC survey dogs that died at <3.5 years of age, survival analysis was used to derive Kaplan-Meier product limit estimates of the survival functions with post hoc pairwise log rank tests and results are reported as median survival time (MST) with 95 per cent confidence intervals. The proportions of dogs surviving to 12 years and those alive at/beyond 15.6 years of age were compared using cross-tabulations with χ2 or Fisher's exact tests. Level of significance for multiple comparisons was set at P<0.008 using a Bonferroni correction as α/k where α/is 0.05 and k is the number of comparisons (six). A one-sample sign test was used to compare the median age at death of the longevity cohort to the average/typical life span of 12 years for labradors. The current cohort lived significantly longer than each of the historical comparison groups (P<0.0001). Survival analysis revealed significant differences in MSTs with the present cohort living longer than each of the other groups (P≤0.004, Table 1, Fig 1). Almost 90 per cent of the present cohort reached the average expected age of 12 years for labrador retrievers while only 30 per cent of the US ‘Control’ group achieved this (P<0.0001, Table 2). Additionally, 28 per cent of the dogs in the present cohort reached/exceeded exceptional longevity, defined as being alive at/beyond 15.6 years of age6 and this was significantly greater than any of the historical comparison groups (P<0.0001, Table 2). Furthermore, the median age at death in the present cohort of 14.01 years was significantly greater than the average/typical life span of 12 years for labrador retrievers (P<0.0001). While age at neutering was not found to be linked to longevity in the present cohort, evaluation of the effect of age of neutering was not possible for the US dogs.5 Kaplan-Meier survival curves showing that the longevity study group lived significantly longer than the historical comparison groups. KC, Kennel Club. In spite of being 16 years and 17 years of age, the last five dogs in the present cohort continued to be full of life, active, social and highly engaged with their animal welfare specialists and social groups. This suggests that the dogs experienced an increase in health span and not only in the actual years lived. The dogs in the present cohort were more closely related than the dogs in the UK KC study but less closely related than the dogs in the US sibling-matched study and this suggests that while genetics is important, it is unlikely to be the primary driver of longevity. The environmental conditions that the dogs in the present cohort experienced were similar to those of the dogs in the US study while the dogs in the KC study were dogs kept by owners belonging to a UK breed club. There are likely to be differences in the living conditions experienced by the different groups of dogs that may have affected longevity. However, the reduced variation and fewer changes over time in management factors of the present cohort provided an opportunity to evaluate life span while controlling for the potential confounding impact of such variables. The results of this study showed that the present cohort lived significantly longer than previously studied labradors and had a greater than expected proportion living well beyond that of the expected breed life span, despite the limitations of using historical comparison groups and the fact that all of these groups of dogs are inherently biased. These 39 labradors experienced a combination of a high quality plane of nutrition with appropriate husbandry and healthcare. Increased understanding and control of the ageing process provides an opportunity to estimate the impact of the longevity dividend. For human beings this is defined as the social, economic and health bonuses for both individuals and populations that accrue as a results of medical interventions to slow the rate of ageing.7 The importance of the ‘oldest of the old’ dogs as reported here is that they can provide a model system for exploring the longevity dividend in human beings as well as dogs.8 VJA and JP received payment from Spectrum Brands (and formerly P&G) for provision of analytical services and interpretation of data. KC and DMM are employees of Spectrum Brands (and formerly of P&G). Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,751
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,155
Tête enseignante GPT0,356
Écart entre enseignants0,200 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations18
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVeterinary RecordMême sujetVeterinary Medicine and SurgeryTravaux en français237 207