MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035248181 · doi:10.1292/jvms.14-0083

A Retrospective Histopathological Survey on Canine and Feline Liver Diseases at the University of Tokyo between 2006 and 2012

2014· article· en· W2035248181 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Naoki Hirose, Kazuyuki Uchida, Hideyuki Kanemoto, Koichi Ohno, James Chambers, Hiroyuki Nakayama

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatocellular carcinomaPathologyHepatocellular adenomaPolycystic liver diseaseHepatitisLiver diseaseViral hepatitisGastroenterologyAdenomaInternal medicineLiver transplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To determine the incidence of hepatic diseases in dogs and cats in Japan, a retrospective study was performed using data of 463 canine and 71 feline liver biopsies at the Veterinary Medical Center of the University of Tokyo. The most common canine hepatic disease was microvascular dysplasia (MVD) and occupied 29.4% of all diagnoses. This terminology might contain "real" MVD and primary portal vein hypoplasia, because these two conditions were difficult to be clearly distinguished histopathologically. Parenchymal and interstitial hepatitis and primary hepatic tumors accounted for 23.5% and 21.0% of the diagnoses, respectively. Parenchymal and interstitial hepatitis occupied 34.1% of non-proliferative canine hepatic diseases, while hepatocellular adenoma and carcinoma were 26.6% and 24.5% of proliferative hepatic diseases, respectively. Breed-specificity was seen in MVD for Yorkshire terrier, Papillon and Toy poodle, in hepatitis for Doberman pinscher and Labrador retriever, in cholangiohepatitis for American cocker spaniel, Miniature schnauzer and Pomeranian, in hepatocellular adenoma for Golden retriever and Shiba and in hepatocellular carcinoma for Shih Tzu. The most common feline liver disease was parenchymal and interstitial hepatitis (45.1% of all diagnoses). Among feline hepatitis, neutrophilic cholangiohepatitis (23.9%), lymphocytic cholangiohepatitis (14.1%) and chronic hepatitis (5.6%) were recorded. Adult polycystic liver disease was 5.6%. Among proliferative diseases in the feline liver (11.3% of the all), lymphoma (4.2%) and primary epithelial tumors (4.2%) including hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocellular adenoma and cholangiocellular carcinoma were observed. Hepatic degeneration was 14.1%, and MVD was 12.7%, respectively.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations63
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical ScienceSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207