Video otoscopy as a diagnostic tool for canine otoacariasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canine otoacariasis, or otodectic mange, is a common parasitic disorder of dogs' ear canals caused by the mite Otodectes cynotis. Infestation can be detected through diverse protocols of varying sensitivity. We evaluated the use of video otoscopy in comparison with conventional otoscopy and cerumen examination under a microscope for diagnosing O. cynotis in dogs. Thirty-five dogs were evaluated bilaterally for the presence of ear mites, using a veterinary otoscope (Gowlands®), a video otoscope (Welch Allyn®) and the gold-standard technique of examination of swab-collected cerumen under a microscope. Each ear was considered to represent one sample, and 69 ears were examined, since one dog presented with one completely stenotic ear canal. Ear mites were diagnosed in 59.42% (41/69) through video otoscopy. The same 41 infested ear canals were detected by means of cerumen examination under a microscope, whereas conventional otoscopy was able to diagnose mites in only 39.13% (27/69). This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Video otoscopy proved to be superior to conventional otoscopy, and equivalent to the gold standard for detection of O. cynotis in canine ear canals, and should be recommended for controlled trials on drug efficacy for treatment of canine otoacariasis.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".