Congestive Heart Failure in Dogs -A Prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fifty seven dogs diagnosed with congestive heart failure, employing history, clinical signs, radiography and electro-cardiography were studied for historical and clinical variants; epidemiological, radiographic and electrocardiographic changes; and treatment response. Large and giant breeds (Doberman, Labrador, Great Dane, German Shepherd, Mastiff and Boxer) had higher incidence (91.22%) and males (10.4:1) were more predisposed. Dogs older than 3 years were more affected. The most common symptoms associated with congestive heart failure in dogs were weakness, shortness of breath, cardiac gallops or arrhythmias. Mortality was high in dogs with clinical severity of scale - 4. Electrocardiograms were abnormal in most of the cases. Thoracic radiography lacked correlation with clinical signs and prognosis in many cases. Survival time of dogs, undergone therapy, varied from 6 to 14 months and was not correlated with the clinical severity at the time of diagnosis. Though, the dogs responded favourably during initial phase, deterioted at different points of time after 6 months therapy making the prognosis poor.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".