MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W16995256

Characteristics of drug use on sheep farms in Ontario, Canada.

2010· article· en· W16995256 on OpenAlexaffabout
Catherine S Moon, Olaf Berke, Brent P. Avery, Scott A. McEwen, Richard J. Reid‐Smith, Lisa Scott, Paula Menzies

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxytetracyclineAntimicrobialPenicillinDrugAntimicrobial drugMedicineAntibioticsVeterinary medicineBiotechnologyBiologyPharmacologyMicrobiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined characteristics of the use of drugs, especially antimicrobials, on Ontario sheep farms. Forty-nine sheep farms participated in a 12-month prospective study. Producers documented treatment events during the study period and drug use data from the records were summarized. The most frequently used drugs of the 15 drug categories used by producers belonged to the following categories: antimicrobial (40.7%, n=2710), vitamin/mineral (12.0%), and biological (11.1%). Short-acting penicillin (27.2%, n=1103), long-acting oxytetracycline (22.9%), and long-acting penicillin (21.9%) were the most frequently used antimicrobials. The drugs that were used most frequently on sheep farms were antimicrobials, of which 93% of treatments were extra-label. Extensive extra-label drug use may be the result of the limited number of drugs that are approved in Canada for use in sheep.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.159 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→