Surgical correction of everted membrana nictitans in through anterior conjunctival approach in a dog.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eversion of the membrana nictitans was recorded commonly in large breeds of dogs (Gelatt, 1970; Gelatt, 1972 and Martin, 1970). It was attributed to result from a more rapid growth of the posterior portion of the cartilage compared with that of the anterior protion (Martin, 1970) or due to prominence of the nictitans and adherent conjunctival surfaces (Gelatt and Gelatt, 1994). The everted cartilage appeared as an anterior folding of the leading edge of the nictitating membrane with exposure of the posterior aspect. Standard surgical method for the correction of the condition is to remove the scrolled portion of the cartilage from the posterior side while the anterior conjunctival surface, the leading margin, and the gland were left intact (Moore, 1993). In this report a case of successful surgical correction of everted membrana nictitans in seven-month-old Labrador Retriever, through an anterior conjunctival approach is recorded.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".