Outcome of medical and surgical treatment in dogs with cervical spondylomyelopathy: 104 cases (1988–2004)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes and survival times for dogs with cervical spondylomyelopathy (CSM; wobbler syndrome) treated medically or surgically. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 104 dogs. PROCEDURES: Medical records of dogs were included if the diagnosis of CSM had been made on the basis of results of diagnostic imaging and follow-up information (minimum, 6 months) was available. Ordinal logistic regression was used to compare outcomes and the product-limit method was used to compare survival times between dogs treated surgically and dogs treated medically. RESULTS: 37 dogs were treated surgically, and 67 were treated medically. Owners reported that 30 (81%) dogs treated surgically were improved, 1 (3%) was unchanged, and 6 (16%) were worse and that 36 (54%) dogs treated medically were improved, 18 (27%) were unchanged, and 13 (19%) were worse. Outcome was not significantly different between groups. Information on survival time was available for 33 dogs treated surgically and 43 dogs treated medically. Forty of the 76 (53%) dogs were euthanized because of CSM. Median and mean survival times were 36 and 48 months, respectively, for dogs treated medically and 36 and 46.5 months, respectively, for dogs treated surgically. Survival times did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In the present study, neither outcome nor survival time was significantly different between dogs with CSM treated medically and dogs treated surgically, suggesting that medical treatment is a viable and valuable option for management of dogs with CSM.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".