MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vertebral scale system to measure heart size in thoracic radiographs of Indian Spitz, Labrador retriever and Mongrel dogs

2016· article· en· W2338444709 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary World · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLabrador RetrieverRadiographyMedicineThoracic vertebraeAnatomyCarnivoraMeasure (data warehouse)SurgeryInternal medicineLumbar vertebraeLumbar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To establish reference values of vertebral heart score (VHS) in Indian Spitz, Labrador retriever, and Mongrel dogs; to assess applicability of VHS in these three dog breeds; to determine if breed, recumbency side, gender, body weight, and thoracic depth (TD) to thoracic width (TW) ratio has an influence on the VHS measurement in these dog breeds. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60, client owned, clinically healthy Indian Spitz (n=20, mean age = 4.25±2.15 years, body weight = 11.87±2.7 kg), Labrador retriever (n=20, mean age = 4.75±1.91 years, body weight = 27.31±5.43 kg), and Mongrel dogs (n=20, mean age = 4.25±1.52 years, body weight = 16.25±3.99 kg), having no radiological and clinical signs of cardiovascular or pulmonary disease were included in the study. All dogs were restrained manually and left lateral (LL) and right lateral (RL) radiographic views were obtained. The size of heart in lateral radiographs was calculated using VHS method. Besides, the TD, TW and TD: TW were calculated to determine the type of thoracic conformation in the dog breeds. In addition to this, the effect of breed, side of recumbency, gender, body weight, and TD to TW ratio on the calculation of VHS was determined. RESULTS: VHS was calculated in all the animals of the breeds. VHS in Spitz and Labrador retriever was significantly (p<0.0001, p<0.0001, respectively) >9.7±0.5 v. RL and LL VHS in Mongrel dog was significantly (p<0.037) >9.7±0.5 v. Significant (p<0.05) differences in the VHS were observed among Spitz, Labrador retriever and Mongrel dogs, being higher for Labrador retriever followed by Spitz and Mongrel dogs. VHS in RL recumbency was significantly (p<0.001) greater than VHS in LL recumbency in all three breeds. LL and RL VHS correlated significantly with each other in Spitz (r=0.58; p=0.02), Labrador retriever (r=0.87; p<0.0001), and Mongrel dogs (r=0.93; p<0.0001). Significant (p<0.05) differences in the TD and TW were observed among Spitz, Labrador retriever, and Mongrel dogs. Non-significant effect of gender, body weight, and TD to TW ratio on the VHS measurement was observed in each dog breed. CONCLUSION: Breed-specific VHS reference ranges should be used for the objective measurement of heart size in dogs. Furthermore, the radiographic view should also be taken into consideration to avoid any erroneous interpretation of cardiac enlargement in dogs.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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