MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Copper toxicosis in the Bedlington terrier: a diagnostic dilemma

2001· article· en· W2028886749 on OpenAlexaff
S. Haywood, I C Fuentealba, Stephen J. Kemp, J. Trafford

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Small Animal Practice · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineMicrosatelliteBiopsyLiver biopsyPathologyAllelePredictive valueLiver diseaseInternal medicineGastroenterologyBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diagnosis of copper toxicosis (CT) in Bedlington terriers by the quantitative and qualitative assessment of copper (Cu) in, and pathology of, biopsies has been largely superseded by a DNA-based assay which uses a microsatellite marker (C04107) linked to the CT disease allele. A retrospective study was conducted comprising 154 liver biopsies from Bedlington terriers with 22 matched DNA markers to compare the two methods in the diagnosis of CT. For the biopsy method, three categories (phenotypes) were identified based on analytical and morphological criteria: 'unaffected' in 83 samples (54 per cent), where Cu was much less than 400 microg/g, and there was an absence of visual Cu or liver damage; 'intermediate' in 18 samples (12 per cent), where Cu was less than 400 microg/g, and there was limited histochemical Cu and no/equivocal damage; and 'affected' in 53 samples (34 per cent), where Cu was greater than 400 microg/g, there was histochemical Cu and liver damage was poorly related to Cu content. In the DNA assay, which was used alone on unrelated individuals, the microsatellite marker failed to identify the CT status of any of the groups. Liver biopsy remains a reliable indicator of Cu accumulation and progressive liver disease in individual dogs. The microsatellite marker C04107 has a predictive value only when supported by a pedigree.

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)0.001
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations28
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Small Animal PracticeSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207