MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966614434 · doi:10.2460/javma.2001.218.541

Intraosseous approach to the nasolacrimal duct for removal of a foreign body in a dog

2001· article· en· W1966614434 on OpenAlex
Eric R. Pope, Erin S. Champagne, D. B. Fox

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemostasis and retained surgical items
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNasolacrimal ductForeign bodyDuct (anatomy)SurgeryAnatomyDorsum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Labrador retriever was evaluated because of chronic mucopurulent discharge from the left eye. A foreign body was identified in the nasolacrimal duct by use of dacryocystorhinography. Attempts to alleviate the inflammation by use of flushing and administration of antimicrobials were unsuccessful. At surgery, the infraorbital foramen was used as a landmark for a skin incision, because the nasolacrimal duct courses dorsal and parallel to the infraorbital canal. An air drill was used to remove the portion of the maxillary bone overlying the nasolacrimal duct, which exposed the intraosseous portion of the duct and allowed removal of a plant-material foreign body. The incision in the duct was allowed to heal by second intention, and the dog recovered without complications.

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)0.003
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.295 · 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