Clinical Findings and Survival in 56 Sick Neonatal New World Camelids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information pertaining to clinical presentation and outcome of neonatal New World camelids (NWC) is limited when compared to calves and foals. HYPOTHESIS: Values of variables at admission and subsequent treatment would predict survival in sick neonatal NWC. ANIMALS: Fifty-six client-owned sick neonatal NWC presented over a 10-year period to the Purdue University Veterinary Teaching Hospital. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed. Inclusion criteria were NWC less than 30 days of age with complete medical records that presented between 2000 and 2010. RESULTS: The median age at presentation was 1 day (range 1-20). The most common diagnoses were systemic inflammatory response syndrome (50%), congenital defects (41%), ophthalmic lesions (21%), sepsis (16%), and gastrointestinal diseases (16%). Sixty-six percent of NWC survived to discharge. Clinicopathologic findings on admission were variable and not specific for disorders. Factors associated with survival were absence of choanal atresia (P = .001, OR: 55.9 [2.5-1,232]), administration of llama plasma (P = .013, OR: 4.9 [1.4-17.7]), and antimicrobial treatment with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMS) (P = .016, OR: 6.5 [1.3-32.2]). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The use of antibiotics, particularly TMS, and llama plasma are recommended in sick neonatal NWC. Results from this study could contribute toward defining a NWC-specific sepsis scoring system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".