Evaluation of a commercially available luteinizing hormone test for its ability to distinguish between ovariectomized and sexually intact bitches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of a commercially available test for measurement of luteinizing hormone (LH) concentrations for its use in distinguishing between ovariectomized and sexually intact bitches. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal cohort study. ANIMALS: 101 sexually intact bitches and 199 ovariectomized bitches PROCEDURE: A commercial test kit was used to assay serum samples for LH concentration. A kappa test was used to assess the consistency of test interpretations. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and consistency of test interpretation in the sample population and in 2 theoretical populations of bitches with differing frequencies of ovarian removal were determined. RESULTS: The test had excellent sensitivity (98%) but moderate specificity (78%) because of a high frequency of false-positive test results. This means that a single high serum LH concentration was not a reliable indicator of ovarian removal. However, a single low serum LH concentration was an excellent indicator that a bitch was sexually intact. The LH test results were positive within 10 days after ovarian removal and remained high in bitches from which ovaries had been removed > 5 years previously. Analysis of kappa values consistently revealed excellent agreement in test interpretation within and among evaluators and over a 6-hour time span. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A single low LH test result confirms the need for ovariectomy in bitches prior to adoption. The test is applicable to bitches that have been ovariectomized prior to puberty and probably applies over the lifespan of the animal.
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 | 0.013 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".