MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Australian veterinarians who work with horses: an analysis

2004· article· en· W2030556863 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Veterinary Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicVeterinary Practice and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)PopulationVeterinary medicineDemographyHorseWorking populationFamily medicineGeographyBiologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To define and describe the population of Australian veterinarians who work with horses. METHOD: Questionnaires were mailed to 866 veterinarians who had been identified as working with horses, and 87% were completed and returned. Data were entered onto an Excel spreadsheet, and analysed using the SAS System for Windows. RESULTS: About 12% of Australia's veterinarians were doing all the veterinary work with horses, and about 3% worked exclusively (> 90%) with horses, but did more than half (58%) of the horse work. Veterinarians working with horses included more males (80%) than the veterinary population as a whole (approximately 60%). Males had an average age of 47 years, females 35. Almost all (94%) worked in private practice, with 31% being employees, 28% partners and 41% sole owners. Females were more likely to be employees than males. Males reported working 55 hours/week; females 49. More females (44%) than males (16%) had worked less than full-time for more than a year. Males expected to work for another 12 years in full-time equivalents, and females for 16. One quarter (24%) saw only horses, but treated 58% of total horse cases. One-half had < 25% horses, and 29% had < 10% of horses in their caseloads. More of the older (54% of those aged > 60) than younger respondents (27% of those < 40) had grown up on farms with animals. One-quarter (24%) decided to become a veterinarian while in primary school, and females decided at a younger age than males. Overall, younger respondents decided at a younger age than did their older counterparts. A veterinarian contributed to the decision for 21% of these veterinarians. CONCLUSION: In this survey, Australian veterinarians who work with horses were found to be typically male, and advanced in their careers. As these older veterinarians retire, there may not be enough veterinarians who are committed to and competent with horses to take their places.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.193 · 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