Evaluation of phenylpropanolamine in the treatment of urethral sphincter mechanism incompetence in the bitch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a multicentre, blinded, placebo-controlled trial, 50 dogs were treated for 28 days with either phenylpropanolamine or a placebo control. Each was given at a dose of one drop per 2 kg orally three times daily, equivalent to 1 mg/kg three times daily of phenylpropanolamine. Dogs that presented with clinical signs consistent with urinary sphincter mechanism incontinence were included in the study. They were examined on three occasions by the investigating veterinary surgeon. The frequency and volume of unconscious urination were scored by veterinary surgeons according to a pre-established scoring system. Phenylpropanolamine proved to be more effective than the placebo in regard to several parameters. At day 28, 85.7 per cent of phenylpropanolamine-treated cases had no episodes of unconscious urination compared with 33.3 per cent of placebo-treated cases. This was statistically significant. Few, mild side effects were seen in either group.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".