An Epidemiological study on Periodontal Diseases in Dogs - A Clinical Study of 103 Canine Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Periodontal diseases are quite common in pet dogs, but seldom draw attention of pet owners and Veterinarians. A study was conducted to determine the epidemiology of periodontal diseases in dogs. Oral cavities of 103 dogs, older than 6 months, were examined and details about feeding practices were recorded. The overall prevalence of periodontal diseases was recorded to be 68.9%. Within a breed, prevalence was high in Spitz (78.45%), Pomeranian (70%), Labrador (62.06%), Mongrel (75%) and other non descriptive breeds (68%) but low in German Shepherd, Dalmatian and Boxer breeds (50% each). In general, dogs given non-vegetarian diet appeared to suffer less than those given only vegetarian diet. Dogs given only vegetarian diet had highest prevalence (75.5%) of dental problems, followed by those given a combination of vegetarian and non-vegetarian diet (65.5%), a combination of both and commercial food (60%), a combination of vegetarian and commercial food (55.56%) and vegetarian and egg (25%).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".