A Cross-Sectional Study of Epilepsy in Danish Labrador Retrievers: Prevalence and Selected Risk Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence and selected risk factors of epilepsy, the proportion of dogs with epilepsy in remission, and the types of seizures in Danish Labrador Retrievers. A prospective cross-sectional study of epilepsy was conducted in 1999-2000. The study was carried out in 2 phases in a reference population consisting of 29,602 individuals. In phase 1, 550 dogs were selected by random sampling stratified by year of birth. A telephone interview was used to identify dogs with possible epilepsy. In phase 2, dogs judged during phase 1 as possibly suffering from epilepsy were further subjected to physical and neurologic examination, CBC, blood chemistry, and a questionnaire on seizure phenomenology. Seventeen dogs were diagnosed with epilepsy, yielding a prevalence of 3.1% (95% CI 1.6-4.6%) in the Danish population of Labrador Retrievers. A diagnosis of epilepsy was 6 times more probable in dogs >4 years (born before 1995) than in younger dogs (born between 1995 and 1999) (P = .004, relative risk = 6.5). No significant difference in risk between genders was observed, nor could any effect of neutering be proven statistically. The frequencies of primary generalized seizures and partial seizures (with or without secondary generalization) were 24 and 70%, respectively. The type of seizures could not be classified in 6%. In conclusion, the 3.1% prevalence of epilepsy in Danish Labrador Retrievers is higher than the 1% prevalence of epilepsy described in the general canine population, establishing that this breed is at increased risk.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".