MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976236944 · doi:10.3168/jds.2010-3559

Diagnosing intramammary infections: Evaluation of definitions based on a single milk sample

2010· article· en· W1976236944 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNovalaitPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of CanadaDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsSample (material)MedicineChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Criteria for diagnosing intramammary infections (IMI) have been debated for many years. Factors that may be considered in making a diagnosis include the organism of interest being found on culture, the number of colonies isolated, whether or not the organism was recovered in pure or mixed culture, and whether or not concurrent evidence of inflammation existed (often measured by somatic cell count). However, research using these criteria has been hampered by the lack of a "gold standard" test (i.e., a perfect test against which the criteria can be evaluated) and the need for very large data sets of culture results to have sufficient numbers of quarters with infections with a variety of organisms. This manuscript used 2 large data sets of culture results to evaluate several definitions (sets of criteria) for classifying a quarter as having, or not having an IMI by comparing the results from a single culture to a gold standard diagnosis based on a set of 3 milk samples. The first consisted of 38,376 milk samples from which 25,886 triplicate sets of milk samples taken 1 wk apart were extracted. The second consisted of 784 quarters that were classified as infected or not based on a set of 3 milk samples collected at 2-d intervals. From these quarters, a total of 3,136 additional samples were evaluated. A total of 12 definitions (named A to L) based on combinations of the number of colonies isolated, whether or not the organism was recovered in pure or mixed culture, and the somatic cell count were evaluated for each organism (or group of organisms) with sufficient data. The sensitivity (ability of a definition to detect IMI) and the specificity (Sp; ability of a definition to correctly classify noninfected quarters) were both computed. For all species, except Staphylococcus aureus, the sensitivity of all definitions was <90% (and in many cases<50%). Consequently, if identifying as many existing infections as possible is important, then the criteria for considering a quarter positive should be a single colony (from a 0.01-mL milk sample) isolated (definition A). With the exception of "any organism" and coagulase-negative staphylococci, all Sp estimates were over 94% in the daily data and over 97% in the weekly data, suggesting that for most species, definition A may be acceptable. For coagulase-negative staphylococci, definitions B (2 colonies from a 0.01-mL milk sample) raised the Sp to 92 and 95% in the daily and weekly data, respectively. For "any organism," using definition B raised the Sp to 88 and 93% in the 2 data sets, respectively. The final choice of definition will depend on the objectives of study or control program for which the sample was collected.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.207 · 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