MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systemic effects of topical and subconjunctival ophthalmic atropine in the horse

2000· article· en· W2114568594 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Ophthalmology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtropineAtropine sulfateMedicineHorseReflexAnesthesiaMotilityPupillary light reflexAbdominal painSurgeryPupilBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To identify any systemic effects of topical and subconjunctival administration of atropine sulfate in the horse. Animals studied Six mature grade horses were treated hourly in one eye with topical ophthalmic atropine drops for 24 h. Five horses were treated subconjunctivally in one eye with 3 mg of atropine sulfate. Procedures Pupillary light reflexes, pupil size, electrocardiographic parameters, girth measurements, intestinal motility, and clinical signs of abdominal pain were monitored. RESULTS: Alteration in auscultated gut motility and clinical signs of abdominal pain were the most sensitive indicators of the systemic manifestations of the topically applied atropine. Gut motility was absent in all horses for periods of 2-18 h in all four abdominal quadrants in horses given topically administered atropine. Signs of abdominal pain were observed in four of six horses that received topical atropine. In the subconjunctival test study, gut motility was absent in three horses for periods of 3-7 h. Uniocular subconjunctival injection of 3 mg atropine sulfate produced signs of abdominal pain in one of six horses. Conclusion The ophthalmic administration of atropine can affect gut motility and induce signs of colic in selected horses.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it