MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of a risk‐screening questionnaire to detect equine lung inflammation: Results of a large field study

2010· article· en· W1893778543 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEquine Veterinary Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBronchoalveolar lavageHorseMedicinePopulationLungAirwayCytologyGastroenterologyInternal medicinePathologySurgeryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: The diagnosis of equine recurrent airway obstruction (RAO) and inflammatory airway disease (IAD) is based on clinical signs and increased inflammatory cell percentages in the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid. Since a BAL is an invasive procedure, a risk-screening questionnaire (RSQ) would be a valuable screening tool for lung inflammation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of a RSQ to detect lower airway inflammation (LAI) in a large population of horses. METHODS: A standardised BAL was performed in the field on 167 horses in Alberta, Canada. Horses were separated into 3 categories: 1) BAL normal; 2) BAL mild to moderate LAI (MLAI), and 3) BAL severe LAI (SLAI). The horse owners were asked to complete a RSQ. The RSQ scores were compared to the BAL results to determine the likelihood of a horse having MLAI, SLAI or no LAI. RESULTS: Based on BAL cytology, 28 (17%) horses were normal and 139 (83%) were abnormal, with 110 (66%) showing MLAI and 29 (17%) SLAI. Horses with SLAI and MLAI had a mean RSQ score of 0.95 and 0.70, respectively, compared to 0.60 for normal BAL horses. Horses with SLAI showed more clinical signs than normal and MLAI horses. The sensitivity and negative predictive values of the RSQ for detecting SLAI using a cut-off score of 0.87, were excellent at 0.90 (95%CI 0.73-0.98) and 0.96 (95%CI 0.82-1.00). Questions on the clinical signs typically found in RAO cases differed significantly between horses with BAL SLAI and those with BAL normal. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of MLAI was high in this population. Although the RSQ did not allow differentiating normal horses from horses with MLAI, it has a high sensitivity to detect horses with SLAI and is therefore a good screening tool for SLAI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.345 · 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