Evidence‐based veterinary medicine in finfish aquaculture in Newfoundland\nand Labrador
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) aquaculture industry is a major contributor of\nsalmon products that help meet protein needs for the world’s growing population. The industry\nin NL continues to grow and evolve and now includes emerging species in its production such as\nAtlantic cod. In a growing industry, with additional species being cultured, there are many\nopportunities to enhance evidence‐based veterinary medicine (EBVM). The multifaceted process\nof EBVM includes critically evaluating published literature related to a particular question.\nRandomized controlled trials (RCT) are considered the best source of information with respect\nto interventions, but these trials are challenging to implement in an aquaculture setting. The\naquaculture industry and their veterinarians need access to quality RCT in order to make sound,\nscientifically based health decisions. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the aquaculture\nindustry and their veterinarians to assist in building this knowledge base to further advance the\nindustry. The Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, together\nwith the Centre for Aquatic Health Sciences, have worked with the NL industry and their\nveterinarians to answer questions while contributing to the process of EBVM.\nThe specific objectives of this research program evolved over time, but were all\ngenerally focused on the need for information in support of EBVM. The research focused on two\nobjectives: evidence in support of trial execution and evidence from trials. The Passive\nIntegrated Transponder (PIT) tagging study in Atlantic cod was developed to determine tag\nplacement and evaluate adverse effects with such tag placement. This study was consistent with\nthe first objective. The second objective was addressed by developing three clinical trials\nrelevant to the NL industry at the time. These clinical trials were in response to questions\naround choosing treatment modalities for Eubothrium crassum, the option to use a\nnutraceutical during the smoltification stage of salmonid production and the use of a salmonid\ndip vaccine in Atlantic cod.\nThe tagging trial showed that there was no negative effect on survival and growth in\nAtlantic cod in the short term, thereby providing evidence to support the use of PIT tags in\nfuture studies.\nThe clinical trials showed (1) that treatment modalities adapted from terrestrial models\ndo not provide predictable results when information is simply transferred, (2) that\nnutraceuticals need to be critically evaluated with respect to their label claims, and (3) that\nvaccination of Atlantic cod may provide protection against pathogens not included in the\nvaccine due to non‐specific immunity.\nThe studies included in this thesis have contributed to the knowledge base used to\ninform aquaculture veterinarians who utilize EBVM. The results also highlighted techniques to\nobtain this information in an aquaculture setting.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».