Short communication: Validation of a point-of-care glucometer for use in dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a hand-held electronic glucometer (Precision Xtra; Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., Mississauga, ON, Canada) for cow-side use in dairy cattle. This device has been validated for measuring blood concentrations of β-hydroxybutyrate in dairy cows. This study was designed to assess the accuracy of whole-blood glucose measurements from the glucose meter relative to a reference chemical analyzer in a diagnostic laboratory. Duplicate samples were taken from the same cows at the same time, into blood tubes with either the glycolysis-inhibiting preservative sodium fluoride (NaF) or without preservative. Glucometer readings were taken on whole blood with no preservative, and laboratory measurements were conducted on serum preserved with NaF. Blood samples were collected from cows between 3 wk before and 5 wk after calving, including during a glucose tolerance test conducted 1 wk before expected calving. Passing-Bablok and Bland-Altman data analyses were used to evaluate the performance of the glucometer relative to the laboratory results. A strong correlation was observed in 709 samples from 81 cows between the hand-held meter and serum from samples preserved with NaF (R(2)=0.95). Overall, 96% of measurements with the glucometer fell within the 95% confidence limits of analysis in the laboratory, although at higher-than-physiologic glucose concentrations (>5.2mmol/L) the glucometer tended to overestimate. The hand-held glucometer appears suitable for rapid measurement of glucose under field conditions in dairy cattle.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".