Clinico-Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Canine Malasseziosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
44 dogs with pruritic localized or generalized skin diseases were examined along with 118 healthy dogs. A patient's history, clinical signs, response to previous therapy and cytologic examination findings were all used in diagnosing Malassezia dermatitis. Skin swabs were collected from 8 anatomical sites for cytological examination. In healthy dogs, Malassezia yeasts were most frequently isolated in the perianal and perioral areas. The frequency of isolation Malassezia were higher in dogs with localized dermatitis, especially in affected areas, indicating role of Malassezia in occurrence of skin lesions. German shepherd and Labrador predominated in present study owing to large population of these breeds. It is important to diagnose and treat any underlying predisposing factors. Topical treatment with Miconazole nitrate (2%) and Chlorhexidine (2%), twice weekly for 3 weeks and systemic treatments with azole derivatives (Ketoconazole, 10mg/kg/dayand Itraconazole, 5mg/kg/day) for 3 weeks were effective in controlling Malasseziadermatitis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".