MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976782935 · doi:10.1136/vr.150.21.655

Evaluation of measurements of the conductivity of quarter milk samples for the early diagnosis of mastitis

2002· article· en· W1976782935 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H. J. Biggadike, Ian Ohnstad, Richard Laven, J.E. Hillerton

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Record · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMilk Development Council
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Somatic cell countMastitisAnimal scienceConductivityMedicineHerdPredictive valueBulk tankVeterinary medicineInternal medicineLactationBiologyIce calvingPregnancyChemistryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measurements of the conductivity of quarter milk samples were made in 31 cows in a 70-cow herd in southeast England, for a period of 15 weeks. Over this period, 42 per cent of cow-weeks and 20 per cent of quarter-weeks had an increase in quarter milk conductivity of 10 per cent of more compared with the mean conductivity of the previous 14 milkings. Fourteen per cent of quarter-weeks had an increase in conductivity of 15 per cent or more. The geometric mean somatic cell count (cell count) was higher in quarter-weeks with a 10 per cent or greater increase in conductivity than in quarter-weeks with a conductivity change of less than 10 per cent. At a conductivity threshold of 10 or 15 per cent and a cell count threshold of 200,000 or 400,000 cells/ml the specificity of this system was estimated to be 85 to 92 per cent, the sensitivity 40 to 54 per cent, the negative predictive value 87 to 93 per cent and the positive predictive value 33 to 55 per cent. The positive predictive value of the individual quarter milk conductivity was insufficiently accurate to be used as the sole criterion for the selection of quarters for early antibiotic treatment.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.822

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.364
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.051 · 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

Citations25
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary RecordSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207