MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2975092291 · doi:10.3168/jds.2019-16741

Lameness during the dry period: Epidemiology and associated factors

2019· article· en· W2975092291 sur OpenAlexafffund
Ruan R. Daros, Hanna Eriksson, Daniel M. Weary, M.A.G. von Keyserlingk

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Dairy Science · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineVeterinary
ThématiqueAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesCiência sem FronteirasAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoDairy Farmers of CanadaSweden-America FoundationZoetis
Mots-clésLamenessMedicineIce calvingDairy cattleLactationAnimal scienceVeterinary medicineSurgeryBiologyPregnancy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Lameness has been extensively studied in lactating cows, whereas few studies have reported on lameness during the dry period. We conducted a prospective longitudinal study to describe the epidemiology of lameness during the dry period and to identify risk factors associated with onset, cure, and chronic cases of lameness. A total of 455 cows from 6 freestall commercial dairy farms were enrolled at 9 wk before calving and gait scored weekly until calving using a 5-point scale. A subset of cows was also followed fortnightly after calving to measure the association between lameness during the dry period and lameness during early lactation. Body condition score (BCS) was assessed in a 5-point scale using increments of 0.5. Hoof-trimming records, parity, and previous lactation milk production were retrieved from farm's database. Cows were considered sound when 2 consecutive scores were ≤2 and lame when 2 consecutive scores = 3, or any assessment with score >3; when in a sequence of scores only one score = 3 (or ≤2), the cow was considered sound (or alternatively lame). Following this lameness definition, we derived weekly lameness status for each cow and calculated the number of new cases of lameness, the number of cure cases and the number of chronic cases. The incidence rate of lameness cases during the dry period was 8.2 lameness cases/100 cow per wk, whereas cure rate was 7.1 cure cases/100 cow per wk; at the end of the dry period 50% of cows had developed lameness and 36% were cured. Multilevel logistic regression models using farm as random effect were fitted to assess (1) the association between being lame in wk 2 or 8 postcalving with being lame in the last week precalving, (2) risk factors for lameness onset, (3) risk factors for lameness cure, and (4) risk factors for chronic lameness. Cows that were lame in the week immediately before calving were more likely to be lame in wk 2 and 8 after calving. We found that the interaction between parity and hoof-trimming before dry-off was associated with lameness onset; primiparous cows that were trimmed before dry-off had lower odds of developing lameness, whereas the opposite was found for multiparous cows. The same interaction was also associated with the odds of chronic lameness. Cows that were diagnosed with noninfectious hoof lesions compared with cows that were not diagnosed with hoof lesions before dry-off, and cows that had BCS <3 compared with cows with BCS 3.0 to 3.5 at dry-off had higher odds of chronic lameness. Conversely, primiparous cows and cows with BCS 3.0 to 3.5 had higher odds of curing lameness during the dry period. Our results suggest that the dry period may be a period of high risk for lameness development and that hoof-trimming before dry-off may not be effective for all cows.

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 candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,034
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,292

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

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

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 Opus0,063
Tête enseignante GPT0,349
Écart entre enseignants0,286 · 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.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
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

Citations40
Publié2019
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Dairy ScienceMême sujetAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesTravaux en français237 207