Efficacy of omeprazole paste for prevention of gastric ulcers in horses in race training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the minimal effective dosage of omeprazole oral paste for the prevention of naturally occurring ulcers in horses starting race training. DESIGN: Prospective study. ANIMALS: 175 horses. PROCEDURE: Horses in the dose selection portion of the study were sham dose treated or received 1 mg (0.45 mg/lb) or 2 mg (0.9 mg/lb) of omeprazole/kg, PO, every 24 hours for 28 days or 4 mg of omeprazole/kg (1.8 mg/lb; loading dose), PO, every 24 hours for 4 days, then 1 or 2 mg of omeprazole/kg, PO, every 24 hours for 24 days. Horses in the dose confirmation portion of the study were sham dose treated or received 1 mg of omeprazole/kg, PO, every 24 hours for 28 days. Gastric ulcer scores at the beginning and end of the study were compared. RESULTS: Sham-dose-treated horses had significantly higher ulcer scores than did horses treated with any of the omeprazole dosages evaluated. Among horses treated with omeprazole, there was no significant interaction of dose (1 or 2 mg/kg) and loading dose; therefore, the lowest effective dose (1 mg/kg) was evaluated in the dose confirmation portion of the study. In the dose confirmation study, 4 of 39 (10%) sham-dose-treated horses remained ulcer free, which was significantly different from the proportion of horses (31/38 [82%]) receiving 1 mg of omeprazole/kg that remained ulcer free. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE; Results indicated that omeprazole administered at a dosage of 1 mg/kg, PO, every 24 hours for 28 days was effective for prevention of gastric ulcers in horses starting race training.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".