MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1913266107

Animal control measures and their relationship to the reported incidence of dog bites in urban Canadian municipalities.

2013· article· en· W1913266107 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nancy Clarke, David W. Fraser

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicRabies epidemiology and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingLegislationEnforcementEnvironmental healthBreedMedicineBusinessVeterinary medicineDemographyAnimal scienceBiologyEcologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various measures, including ticketing, licensing, and breed-specific legislation, are used by municipalities to control dog bites, but their effectiveness is largely unknown. Thirty-six urban Canadian municipalities provided information about their animal control practices, resourcing, and (for 22 municipalities) rate of reported dog bites. Municipalities differed widely in rates of licensing (4% to 75%) and ticketing (0.1 to 83 per 10,000 people), even where staffing and budgets were similar. Reported frequency of dog bites ranged from 0 to 9.0 (median 1.9) per 10,000 people. Rates were generally higher in municipalities with higher ticketing, licensing, staffing, and budget levels. However, in municipalities with very active ticketing the reported bite rate was much lower than predicted by a linear regression on ticketing rate (quadratic regression, R(2) = 0.52), likely reflecting a reduction in actual bites with very active enforcement. Municipalities with and without breed-specific legislation did not differ in reported bite rate. Ticketing appeared most effective in reducing dog bites, although it may also lead to increased reporting.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicRabies epidemiology and controlFrench-language works237,207