Ocular and systemic manifestations after oral administration of a high dose of enrofloxacin in cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the effects of oral administration of a high dose of enrofloxacin to cats. ANIMALS: 24 (12 male and 12 female) young healthy cats. PROCEDURES: Cats were allocated on the basis of sex into 2 groups (4 males and 4 females/ group) from which 3 subgroups for 3 durations (3, 5, or 7 days) of enrofloxacin (50 mg/kg, PO, q 24 h) or control solution (1 mL of water, PO, q 24 h) administration that began on day -1 were created. Funduscopic examinations were performed daily. Electroretinography (ERG) was performed before and every 2 to 3 days after the start of oral administration. Four cats/study group were euthanized on days 3, 5, and 7, and eyes were collected for light and electron microscopic evaluations. RESULTS: Neurologic, funduscopic, and ERG abnormalities were evident only in cats administered enrofloxacin. Funduscopic changes (granular appearance or graying of the area centralis) were noticed on or before day 3 (after only 3 days of enrofloxacin administration), with subsequent similar changes along the visual streak. Vascular attenuation (between days 2 and 4) and generalized tapetal hyperreflectivity (between days 5 and 7) followed. Reduction in b-wave ERG amplitude preceded funduscopic changes. Morphologic changes in the photoreceptor layers correlated with duration of enrofloxacin administration, with generalized degenerative changes evident after 3 doses. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The study indicated that a high dose of enrofloxacin (50 mg/kg/d, PO) induced retinal and systemic changes. Enrofloxacin at 10 times the recommended dosage is acutely toxic to the outer retina of clinically normal cats.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".