MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Feline hypertension: clinical findings and response to antihypertensive treatment in 30 cases

2001· article· en· W2027277713 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Elliott, P. J. Barber, Harriet M. Syme, J. M. Rawlings, P. J. Markwell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Small Animal Practice · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Medicine and Surgery
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada
FundersKU Leuven
KeywordsMedicineAmlodipineBlood pressureSurgeryIsolated systolic hypertensionCATSInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systolic hypertension was diagnosed in 30 cats. At diagnosis, 16 of those were found to be in chronic renal failure only, while five were azotaemic and either receiving treatment for hyperthyroidism (four cases) or were untreated hyperthyroid cases (one case). Two cases were untreated hyperthyroid cases with no evidence of azotaemia and the remaining seven cases had no definitive diagnosis of the underlying cause of their hypertension. The successful treatment used for the majority of cases was amlodipine, which lowered systolic blood pressure from 202.5+/-16.8 to 153.2+/-21.6 mmHg (mean+/-SD; n=29) within the first 50 days. Each case was followed for at least three months, or to the end of its natural life, and each cat was re-examined every six to eight weeks. Systolic blood pressure was kept below a target value of 165 mmHg in 58 per cent of cases treated for three months or longer. At the time of writing, 19 of the cases had died or been euthanased with a median treatment time of 203 days, one case was lost to follow-up and 10 cases were still alive, nine of which had been treated for six months or more. Amlodipine can be used for long-term control of feline systemic hypertension.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.257
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.167 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations165
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Small Animal PracticeSame topicVeterinary Medicine and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207