Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIP dysplasia remains a common orthopaedic disease of dogs despite many years of selective breeding based on early detection of affected animals through the British Veterinary Association/Kennel Club (BVA/KC) Hip Dysplasia Scheme. While selective breeding can alter an animal's genes, factors such as diet, bodyweight and exercise have a major influence on the phenotypic expression of an individual's genotype. For example, labrador retrievers fed 25 per cent less than littermates fed ad libitum have been found to have a lower frequency and severity of hip dysplasia and subsequent osteoarthritis. Although controversial, it has been suggested that as few as 24 per cent of young dogs with severe radiographic signs of hip dysplasia will actually develop clinically significant hip disease if managed appropriately. This can make it difficult to determine whether an individual dog should be managed conservatively or surgically and, if the latter, when the most appropriate time is to perform that surgery. This article reviews the current literature on the treatment of dogs with hip dysplasia and discusses the indications for surgical management of the condition.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".