MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2174598374 · doi:10.5326/15473317-37-5-438

Cause of death in dogs according to breed: a necropsy survey of five breeds

2001· article· en· W2174598374 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linden E. Craig

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Animal Hospital Association · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicRabies epidemiology and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreedCause of deathDiseaseGerman Shepherd DogNeoplastic diseaseVeterinary medicinePediatricsPathologyAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The final necropsy diagnoses, obtained between 1985 and 1999, were compared among 1,206 golden retrievers, boxers, German shepherd dogs, Labrador retrievers, and rottweilers. A significantly larger proportion of boxers and golden retrievers died of neoplastic disease than the other three breeds. The ages at death were not significantly different among golden retrievers, German shepherd dogs, and Labrador retrievers. However, rottweilers and boxers died at a younger age from both neoplastic and nonneoplastic diseases. Although boxers were already known to be at a higher risk for neoplasia, a similar index of suspicion for neoplasia should now be used for golden retrievers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations47
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Animal Hospital AssociationSame topicRabies epidemiology and controlFrench-language works237,207