MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2306713837

Health status and risk factors associated with failure of passive transfer of immunity in newborn beef calves in Québec.

2003· article· en· W2306713837 on OpenAlexaffabout
Virginie Filteau, Émile Bouchard, Gilles Fecteau, Lucie Dutil, Denis DuTremblay

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColostrumPassive immunityIce calvingMedicineImmunityAnimal scienceHerd immunityImmune systemAntibodyImmunologyBiologyPregnancyLactationVaccination
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Risk factors associated with failure of passive transfer of immunity (FPT) were evaluated among newborn beef calves in Québec. Physical examination was performed on calves born of a normal calving and blood samples were collected for determination of health status and measurement of serum concentration of immunoglobulin (Ig) G1. Of 225 calves, from 45 herds, 19% showed FPT (serum IgG1 concentration < 10.0 g/L). Calves born in a stanchion-stall were more likely to show FPT (OR: 10.2). Calves bottle-fed colostrum were less at risk for FPT (OR: 0.06). Calf gender, month of birth, dam parity, and dam body condition score were not associated with FPT. No association was detected between FPT and health status. Special care should be given to calves born from cows in a stanchion-stall to ensure adequate colostrum intake. Failure of passive transfer of immunity should be considered with other risk factors when investigating morbidity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations68
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207