A romifidine and morphine combination for epidural analgesia of the flank in cattle.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the study reported here was to determine the onset, duration, and degree of analgesia achieved with a combination of romifidine (50 microg/kg body weight [BW]) and morphine (0.1 mg/kg BW) administered epidurally. Ten adult Holstein Friesen cows were assigned to either a treatment group receiving the romifidine and morphine combination or a control group receiving 0.9% saline in a randomized, blinded, crossover design. Cows were assessed for degree of flank analgesia and systemic sedation at various time intervals over a period of 24 hours. The romifidine and morphine combination, compared with saline, provided significant analgesia for at least 10 minutes (P = 0.016) and up to 12 hours (P = 0.004) after epidural administration. Treated cows were sedate between 10 minutes (P = 0.016) and 6 hours (P = 0.002) after epidural administration. These results provide evidence for a potential cost-effective intra- and postoperative method of analgesia; however, the sedation seen in this study could be detrimental to patients expected return to the farm shortly after surgery. Further research into withdrawal times, systemic effects, and potential adverse effects are needed before an opiod and alpha2-adrenergic agonist combination can be used safely in a clinical setting.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".