MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Epidemiology of canine glaucoma presented to University of Zurich from 1995 to 2009. Part 1: Congenital and primary glaucoma (4 and 123 cases)

2011· article· en· W1888665730 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Hässig, Tine Moesgaard Iburg, Bernhard M. Spiess

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Ophthalmology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlaucomaOphthalmologyEpidemiologyMedicineOptometryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the epidemiology of canine congenital and primary glaucoma in the cases presented to the University of Zurich, Vetsuisse Faculty (UZH) from 1995 to 2009. METHODS: Information was obtained from the computer database of patients examined by members of the UZH Ophthalmology Service, between January 1995 and August 2009. Congenital and primary glaucoma was diagnosed based on the age of onset, the lack of evidence of any antecedent eye conditions, and/or the presence and severity of iridocorneal angle defects. The data was evaluated for breed, gender and age at presentation. RESULTS: A total of 5984 dogs presented to the UZH Ophthalmology service between 1995 and 2009. Four dogs of different breed were diagnosed with congenital glaucoma and 123 dogs were diagnosed with primary glaucoma. For the primary glaucomas the overall male to female ratio (M:F) was 1:1.41 and the age of onset ranged from 0.12 to 18.3 years with a mean of 7.3 ± 3.6 years. Data suggested a predisposition for primary glaucoma in the Siberian Husky, Magyar Vizsla and Newfoundland from 2004 to 2009. CONCLUSION: The report presents the epidemiology of canine congenital and primary glaucomas presented to the UZH from 1995 to 2009. A previous suspicion of predisposition for primary glaucoma in the Newfoundland dog (n = 6) and the Magyar Vizsla breed (n = 8) was confirmed.

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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations46
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary OphthalmologySame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207