Evaluation of a circumferential femoral head osteophyte as an early indicator of osteoarthritis characteristic of canine hip dysplasia in dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between a circumferential femoral head osteophyte (CFHO) and osteoarthritis characteristic of canine hip dysplasia, and to ascertain whether CFHO, like osteoarthritis, varies between diet-restricted and control-fed dogs. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. ANIMALS: 48 Labrador Retrievers. PROCEDURES: Dogs were paired by size, sex, and litter and assigned to 1 of 2 equal groups at 2 months of age. The control-fed group was fed ad libitum, and the diet-restricted group was fed 25% less on a pairwise basis of the same diet for life. The dogs' hip joints were radiographed yearly for life. Each radiograph was evaluated for radiographic signs of osteoarthritis characteristic of hip dysplasia and for the presence and severity of a CFHO. RESULTS: 41 of the 48 (85.4%) dogs had a CFHO, which was detected at a median age of 5.4 years, and 33 of those 41 (80.5%) developed radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis. Nineteen (79.2%) dogs in the diet-restricted group and 22 (91.7%) in the control-fed group had a CFHO at a median age of 9 and 3 years, respectively. Of the dogs with a CFHO, 12 (63.2%) in the diet-restricted group and 20 (90.0%) in the control-fed group developed radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis characteristic of hip dysplasia at a median age of 11 and 6.5 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results indicated a relationship between the CFHO and subsequent development of radiographic signs of osteoarthritis. If a CFHO is present in Labrador Retrievers, it might be considered an early indicator of osteoarthritis.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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".