MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274459932 · doi:10.1111/eve.12559

Equine faecal microbiota transplant: Current knowledge, proposed guidelines and future directions

2016· review· en· W2274459932 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen R. Mullen, Koji Yasuda, Thomas J. Divers, J. Scott Weese

Bibliographic record

VenueEquine Veterinary Education · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClostridium difficileFecal bacteriotherapyIntensive care medicineInflammatory bowel diseaseDiseaseHorseInternal medicineAntibioticsMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary While certainly not a novel concept, faecal microbiota transplant ( FMT ) has recently garnered renewed interest in veterinary medicine due to its remarkable success in treating recurrent Clostridium difficile infection ( CDI ) in man. There is a dearth of information on indications and efficacy of FMT for the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders in the horse; however, based on evidence in man and other veterinary species, and anecdotal reports in horses, FMT may be a useful treatment for selected cases of acute and chronic diarrhoea and inflammatory bowel disease ( IBD ) in the horse. In the absence of evidence, expert opinion is offered on case selection and FMT procedure. More research is needed to explore the efficacy, indications and optimal preparation, storage and delivery of FMT to horses.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations60
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEquine Veterinary EducationSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207