Effects of 2 different infusion rates of medetomidine on sedation score, cardiopulmonary parameters, and serum levels of medetomidine in healthy dogs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of 2 different continuous rate infusions (CRIs) of medetomidine over an 8-hour period on sedation score, selected cardiopulmonary parameters, and serum levels of medetomidine were evaluated in 6 healthy, conscious dogs using a crossover study design. The treatment groups were: CONTROL = saline bolus followed by saline CRI; MED1 = 2 μg/kg body weight (BW) medetomidine loading dose followed by 1 μg/kg BW per hour CRI; and MED2 = 4 μg/kg BW medetomidine loading dose followed by 2 μg/kg BW per hour CRI. Sedation score (SS), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), temperature (TEMP), systolic arterial pressure (SAP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), arterial and mixed venous blood gas analyses, lactate, and plasma levels of medetomidine were evaluated at baseline, at various intervals during the infusion, and 2 h after terminating the infusion. Statistical analysis involved a repeated measures linear model. Both infusion rates of medetomidine-induced dose-dependent increases in SS and dose-dependent decreases in HR, SAP, MAP, and DAP were measured. Respiratory rate (RR), TEMP, central venous pH, central venous oxygen tension, and oxygen extraction ratio also decreased significantly in the MED2 group at certain time points. Arterial oxygen and carbon dioxide tensions were not significantly affected by either infusion rate. In healthy dogs, both infusion rates of medetomidine-induced clinically relevant sedative effects, accompanied by typical alpha2 agonist-induced hemodynamic effects, which plateaued during the infusion and subsequently returned to baseline. While additional studies in unhealthy animals are required, the results presented here suggest that medetomidine infusions at the doses studied may be useful in canine patients requiring sedation for extended periods.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".