Canine urolithiasis: a look at over 16 000 urolith submissions to the Canadian Veterinary Urolith Centre from February 1998 to April 2003.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to report on the age, sex, breed, and mineral composition of 16 647 canine bladder uroliths submitted to the Canadian Veterinary Urolith Centre between February 1998 and April 2003. Each urolith submission was accompanied by a questionnaire. Of the submissions, approximately 43.8% were struvite and 41.5% oxalate. Struvite uroliths were most common in female dogs. Mixed breed dogs predominated, followed by the shih tzu, bichon frise, miniature schnauzer, Lhasa apso, and Yorkshire terrier. Oxalate uroliths were most common in males and in the miniature schnauzer, bichon frise, Lhasa apso, shih tzu, and Yorkshire terrier. Urate uroliths were most common in male Dalmations. Other urolith types, including cystine, xanthine, silica, and calcium phosphate, were less commonly reported. A review of risk factors for the various uroliths is presented, along with some recommendations for treatment and prevention.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".