Effect of analgesia during hoof trimming on gait, weight distribution, and activity of dairy cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sixty-six lactating cows were either injected with flunixin meglumine (2.2mg/kg of BW) immediately before hoof trimming (n=28), injected with a saline solution immediately before hoof trimming (n=28), or injected with a saline solution immediately before sham hoof trimming (control; n=10). Gait scores, time spent lying down, frequency of steps, and how cows distributed their weight among their legs when standing before, during, and after injections were measured to assess whether automated measures of activity and weight distribution can detect lameness and the effects of pain mitigation during hoof trimming. The overall gait score was positively correlated with the variability of the weight applied the rear legs (r=0.32) and negatively correlated with the rear leg weight ratio (LWR; r=-0.52) and the frequency of steps (r=-0.43). The rear LWR was the best predictor of cows being lame (NRS >3), accounting for 27% of the variation in the likelihood of a cow being lame and 11% of the variation in the likelihood of a cow having an infectious hoof lesion. For each 5% increase in the rear LWR, the likelihood of being lame decreased by 30% (odds ratio = 0.71; 95% confidence interval = 0.56, 0.90) and the likelihood of being afflicted with an infectious hoof disease decreased by 20% (odds ratio = 0.81; 95% confidence interval = 0.67, 0.98). Neither hoof trimming nor a combination of hoof trimming and analgesia significantly affected gait score or any measure of weight distribution. Daily lying time increased during the 2 d following hoof trimming independently of the flunixin meglumine injection. However, this increase was not sustained for longer than 2 d when cows were injected with flunixin meglumine. Measures of weight shifting between legs while cows are standing and measures of activity show great potential as automated methods of detecting lameness and may also provide a tool for future evaluation of lameness therapies, such as hoof trimming and pain mitigation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".