Out-patient antimicrobial drug use in dogs and cats for new disease events from community companion animal practices in Ontario.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated oral and parenteral antimicrobial use in dogs and cats, and evaluated antimicrobial use in feline upper respiratory tract disease (FURTD), feline lower urinary tract disease (FLUTD), and canine infectious tracheobronchitis. Study journals (n = 1807) were submitted by 84 veterinarians. Sixty-five percent of the antimicrobials prescribed in dogs and 67% in cats were β-lactams. Most frequently prescribed in dogs were cephalexin (33%) and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (16%), and in cats, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (40%) and cefovecin (17%); 7% of the prescriptions in dogs and 12% in cats were for fluoroquinolones. Sixty-seven percent of the disease events associated with canine infectious tracheobronchitis, and 70% and 74% associated with FURTD and FLUTD, respectively, were treated with antimicrobials. These results suggest that cefovecin and fluoroquinolones may be over-used and antimicrobial use for the treatment of FURTD, FLUTD, and canine infectious tracheobronchitis could probably be reduced to lessen resistance selection pressure without compromising patient health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".