Iris abscesses with and without intralenticular fungal invasion in the horse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical and histologic findings in horses with iris abscesses. Design Retrospective medical records study. ANIMALS STUDIED: Medical records of horses that had iris abscesses at the University of Florida Veterinary Medical Center, Peterson & Smith Equine Hospital, and Veterinary Eye Specialists of London, Ontario, from 2005 to 2008 were reviewed. PROCEDURE: Data collected from the medical records included signalment, clinical and histologic descriptions of ocular lesions, therapy, complications, and visual outcomes. RESULTS: The medical records of two Quarterhorses, one pony, one warmblood, one Westphalian, and one Arab horse with unilateral iris abscesses were identified. Mild-to-severe clinical signs of iridocyclitis were present in all six eyes with iris abscesses. The eyes of two horses with iris abscesses were also associated with deep stromal abscesses and responded to medical therapy alone in one case, and medical therapy and corneal transplantation in the other. Iris abscesses in two horses were also associated with intralenticular invasion due to a Cladosporium and a Fusarium-type fungus respectively, and resulted in enucleations. Two horses with iris abscesses and no apparent lens involvement resolved with medical therapy in one case and surgical removal of the iris abscess and medical therapy in the other. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first clinical report of iris abscesses in the horse, and the first histologic report of fungal invasion of the horse lens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".