Change in intraocular pressure during maturation in Labrador Retriever dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure intraocular pressure (IOP) in a group of dogs as puppies and young adults to determine if there is any change during maturation. Animals studied Thirty-two healthy Labrador Retriever dogs. PROCEDURES: Intraocular pressure was measured using a Tonopen XL initially at approximately 6 weeks of age (T1), then again approximately 1 year later (T2). Exact ages were known based on whelp date. RESULTS: The dogs had marginally higher IOP OU at T2 (mean = 14.9 mmHg) compared to T1 (mean = 13.4 mmHg). However, the difference was not statistically significant. No differences were seen based on sex and litter. Intraocular pressure OD was statistically greater than OS at T1 but not at T2. CONCLUSIONS: Normal values for intraocular pressure are the same in puppies and adults. The results of this study do not support the previously suggested theory that younger dogs have sustained increased IOP as a requirement to drive growth of the globe. However, it does not rule out the possibility that a dynamic relationship between intraocular pressure and expansion of the globe may exist.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".