Population pharmacokinetics of marbofloxacin in horses: preliminary analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population pharmacokinetic of marbofloxacin was investigated on 21 healthy and 16 diseased horses to assess interindividual variability of drug exposure. Demographic, physiologic and disease covariables were tested using mixed effects models. As a preliminary analysis, this study has demonstrated that none of the tested covariables were significant in regression models for compartmental volumes or clearance of distribution, but the clinical status of the horse (healthy/diseased) was a significant covariable (P < 0.01) for systemic clearance. Clearance had a lower mean and a higher variance for diseased horses than healthy horses, with respectively a mean of 0.209 and 0.284 L/h/kg and a coefficient of variation of 52 and 15%. Consequently, variability of AUC was greater in diseased horses. Considering an AUC/MIC ratio below 60 h as a prediction of poor efficacy, a dosage regimen of 2 mg/kg intravenous was deemed to be inadequate for 19% of diseased horses if the MIC of the bacteria was 0.1 microg/mL. However 93% of diseased horses could achieve a ratio above 125 h, predicting a very good efficacy, for the MIC(90) of Enterobacteriacae (0.027 microg/mL).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".