MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Battered pets‘: non‐accidental physical injuries found in dogs and cats

2001· letter· en· W2166118593 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helen M.C. Munro, Michael Thrusfield

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Small Animal Practice · 2001
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Abuse and Related Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAccidentalCATSBreedPoison controlInjury preventionSurgeryEmergency medicineInternal medicineAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Records of 243 cases of non-accidental injury (NAI) in dogs, and 182 cases in cats, submitted by a sample of small animal practitioners in the UK, revealed a wide range of injuries. These included bruises, fractures, repetitive injuries, burns and scalds, stab and incised wounds, poisoning, asphyxiation and drowning (which showed remarkable similarities to NAI in children), as well as sexual abuse and injuries specifically caused by firearms. Traumatic skeletal injuries in the dogs were more commonly found in the anterior part of the skeleton, in comparison with those resulting from road traffic accidents. Young male dogs and young cats were particularly at risk of NAI. A moderately increased risk was identified in the Staffordshire bull terrier, cross-breed dogs and the domestic shorthaired cat, whereas the Labrador retriever showed a decreased risk. No single injury or group of injuries, when divorced from the circumstances surrounding a suspect case, could be considered to indicate, conclusively, NAI. Repetitive injuries, however, were highly suggestive of NAI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations137
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Small Animal PracticeSame topicChild Abuse and Related TraumaFrench-language works237,207