Systematic review of the effect of perch height on keel bone fractures, deformation and injuries, bone strength, foot lesions and perching behavior
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report provides a summary of four systematic reviews on the impact of perch height on laying hen keel bone fractures, deformation and injuries, bone strength, foot lesions and perching behavior. After conducting a scoping review and identifying outcomes of interest, the review protocols were developed. An extensive literature search was conducted in information sources such as CABI, PUBMED and relevant conference proceedings. 1518 abstracts were assessed for relevance and 9 studies reported perch use and 1 reported keel injuries. No studies reported summary effect sizes; therefore it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis. In lieu of a formal meta-analysis, a descriptive analysis was conducted, which plotted reported perch height against metrics of perch use. This descriptive analysis was not able to account for lack of independence, differences in sample size and other importance sources of heterogeneity such as cage height. The descriptive analysis suggested a positive association with metrics that measured perch use and height, i.e., increased usage was associated with increased height.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it