Adverse Reactions in Horses that Underwent General Anesthesia and Cervical Myelography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The study was prompted by a perceived high prevalence of myelographic complications varying in severity and type, and attributed to the contrast material or the procedure. HYPOTHESES: 1. Any adverse reaction (AAR) is associated with a change in CSF volume induced either by removal of CSF or addition of contrast material. 2. AAR occurs more frequently in horses with higher premyelography neurologic grade. 3. Nonspecific hyperthermia is attenuated by anti-inflammatory and osmotic agents. ANIMALS: Horses (n = 278) that underwent myelography between 2000 and 2012 at 5 institutions: A (87), B (68), C (65), D (46), and E (12). METHODS: Multi-institutional, retrospective, observational cross-sectional study. RESULTS: AAR were observed in 95/278 (34%) horses, were associated with longer general anesthesia time (P = .04) and higher contrast-medium volume (P = .04); euthanasia because of AAR was performed in 5/278 (2%) horses. Adverse neurologic reactions were the most common type of complication observed occurring in 15/278 (5%) and 42/235 (18%) of horses in the intra- and postmyelography periods. A relationship between AAR and premyelography neurologic grade was not identified (P = .31). Nonspecific hyperthermia was observed in 25/235 (11%) horses; no relationship was observed with administration of anti-inflammatory drugs and osmotic agents (P = .30). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The category of AAR occurred in one-third of the horses generally was mild and self-limiting. These reactions were associated with increased contrast-medium volume and longer anesthesia time; but, no specific procedural recommendations could be made because of small odds ratios (OR) of <2 for each 1 mL increase in contrast material and for each 1 minute of additional anesthesia time.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".