Comparative short-term efficacy of Oridermyl(®) auricular ointment and Revolution(®) selamectin spot-on against feline Otodectes cynotis and its associated secondary otitis externa.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy of Oridermyl(®) (acaricidal/antibiotic/antifungal/anti-inflammatory ointment) and Revolution(®) (selamectin spot-on) was compared in a blinded randomized study on 24 adult cats with otoacariasis. Twelve cats were treated once daily for 10 d with Oridermyl(®) and 12 cats were treated on Day 0 with Revolution(®). Otitis was assessed with cytological counts of mean number of bacteria and yeast on Days 0 and 10, and scored clinically every other day. All auricular secretions were removed for mite count on Day 10. On Day 0, cytological examination confirmed the presence of secondary bacterial (24/24) and fungal (21/24) infections. No live mites were observed otoscopically after Day 4 and in auricular secretions at Day 10 in both groups. On Day 10, secondary infections were resolved for all cats treated with Oridermyl(®) but were present in all cats treated with Revolution(®). Improvement in clinical signs of otitis over time was superior in the Oridermyl(®) group (P < 0.001).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".