Concentrated tea tree oil toxicosis in dogs and cats: 443 cases (2002–2012)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency, types, and severity of clinical signs; geographic distribution; and treatment information associated with toxicosis caused by 100% tea tree oil (TTO) in dogs and cats in the United States and Canada. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 337 dogs and 106 cats with evidence of exposure to 100% TTO. PROCEDURES: 10-year incident data were retrieved from the ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center database from January 2002 to December 2012. Only evidenced or witnessed incidents assessed as toxicosis or suspected toxicosis were included. Signalment, amount of TTO used, intention of use, and outcome information were evaluated. Severity of illness and correlations with breed, sex, age, and weight were determined. RESULTS: TTO was intentionally used in 395 of 443 (89%) animals. The amount used ranged from 0.1 to 85 mL. Incidents were reported from 41 states, the District of Columbia, and 4 Canadian provinces. Exposure route was cutaneous in 221 (50%) animals, cutaneous and oral in 133 (30%), and oral in 67 (15%). Clinical signs developed within 2 to 12 hours and lasted up to 72 hours. The most common signs were increased salivation or drooling, signs of CNS depression or lethargy, paresis, ataxia, and tremors. A significant association with severity of illness was found for age and weight, with higher prevalence of major illness in younger and smaller cats. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Intentional or accidental use of 100% TTO in dogs or cats caused serious signs of CNS depression, paresis, ataxia, or tremors within hours after exposure and lasting up to 3 days. Younger cats and those with lighter body weight were at greater risk of developing major illness.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".