MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395194669

Veterinarians and SPCAs: an essential partnership.

2002· article· en· W2395194669 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Craig Daniell

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrueltyLegislationAnimal welfareCriminal codeEnforcementPolitical scienceWelfareCriminologyGeneral partnershipLawCriminal lawSociologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animal cruelty is a complex issue to investigate and even more difficult to prosecute successfully. In striving to improve the welfare of all animals, veterinarians and animal protection officers from societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals (SPCAs) are increasingly forming partnerships and a dependency on each other to prevent unnecessary pain and suffering and to relieve distress in all animals. This article seeks to offer a mere glimpse of the vital role that veterinarians play in the enforcement activities of SPCAs across Canada. Whilst my own experience is limited to the situation prevailing in Ontario, I will attempt to focus on a few topics that find application in all provincial societies and, I hope, amongst all veterinarians. Before embarking on such a discussion, it may be prudent to provide a brief synopsis of animal welfare legislation in Canada and to contrast the situation that exists federally, as opposed to provincially. The Criminal Code of Canada, which is federal legislation, applies in every province and territory, irrespective of whether there is a provincial/territorial animal welfare Act or not. Contained within this Code are a small number of criminal offences that, for want of a better term, I will title “Crimes against animals.” They are contained primarily in sections 444 through 447 of the Criminal Code. All provinces, with the exception of Quebec, have an animal welfare Act of some sort, which usually includes the establishment of provincial SPCAs. A number of these provincial animal welfare Acts contain provincial offences that prohibit the causing of distress in animals. In the true sense, these offences are not criminal matters, but rather are quasi-criminal in nature. Other provincial Acts have no provincial offences, and animal protection officers must rely solely on the Criminal Code of Canada to prosecute suspected cases of animal cruelty. All veterinarians should be familiar with the animal cruelty sections of the Criminal Code of Canada and with their respective provincial animal welfare Act.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.015
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0020.018
Research integrity0.0070.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.008

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.164 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicForensic Entomology and Diptera StudiesFrench-language works237,207