MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Milk flow obstruction caused by varicose vein of the teat in dairy cattle

2013· article· en· W2115800157 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène Lardé, Sylvain Nichols, André Desrochers, Marie Babkine, David Francoz, Pierre‐Yves Mulon, Yvon Couture

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Surgery · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiagnosis and Treatment of Venous Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersAmerican College of Surgeons
KeywordsMedicineSclerotherapyVaricose veinsMilkingSurgeryClinical significanceMedical recordVeinInternal medicineAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe varicose vein as a cause of obstruction of the teat cistern in dairy cattle and to report therapeutic options and outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: Dairy cows (n = 22). METHODS: Medical records (1998-2011) of dairy cows admitted for milking difficulties caused by a teat varicose vein were reviewed. Three treatment approaches were used: sclerotherapy, ligation of the vein associated with sclerotherapy, and phlebectomy. Long-term outcome was obtained ≥ 6 months after treatment and defined as a milking improvement. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the population at risk and a chi square test was used to evaluate the relationship between treatments and outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-four teats (22 cows) had a varicose vein. Forequarters were more frequently affected than rear quarters (P < .01). Three sclerotherapies, 12 ligations associated with sclerotherapy and 6 phlebectomies were performed. Five veins were not treated. Overall prognosis with treatment was good (84%) at ≥ 6 months and was not significantly different between treatment types (P = .38). Recurrence of the obstruction by the varicose vein occurred in 3 of 19 teats. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Several surgical options are available for treatment of teat varicose veins. The overall prognosis of return to normal milking is good.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary SurgerySame topicDiagnosis and Treatment of Venous DiseasesFrench-language works237,207