Laboratory blood analysis in Strigiformes—Part <scp>II</scp>: plasma biochemistry reference intervals and agreement between the Abaxis Vetscan V2 and the Roche Cobas c501
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited plasma biochemical information is available in Strigiformes. Only one study investigated the agreement between a point-of-care with a reference laboratory analyzer for biochemistry variables in birds. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to report reference intervals (RI) for plasma biochemistry variables in Strigiformes, and to assess agreement between the Abaxis Vetscan V2 and Roche Cobas c501. METHODS: A prospective study was designed to assess plasma biochemistry RI for concentration of calcium, phosphorus, total protein, albumin, globulin, glucose, bilirubin, uric acid, bile acids, sodium, potassium, and chloride, and activities of AST, GGT, CK, amylase, lipase, LDH, and GLDH. In addition, the agreement between the Vetscan and the Cobas in owl species was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 190 individuals were sampled belonging to 12 Strigiformes species including Barn Owls, Barred Owls, Great Horned Owls, Eurasian Eagle Owls, Spectacled Owls, Eastern Screech Owls, Long-Eared Owls, Short-Eared Owls, Great Gray Owls, Snowy Owls, Northern Saw-Whet Owls, and Northern Hawk-Owls. Order-, species-, and method-specific RI were determined on both analyzers. Although Vetscan data were not equivalent to the Cobas, 4 analytes (glucose, AST, CK, and total protein, with correction for bias) were within acceptable agreement, 3 analytes (uric acid, calcium, and phosphorus) were within close agreement, and the remaining analytes were in strong disagreement. Species-specific differences were observed notably for the concentration of glucose in Barn Owls and electrolytes in Northern Saw-Whet Owls. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study suggests that the Vetscan has acceptable clinical performance in Strigiformes for some analytes and highlights discrepancies for several analytes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".