MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468568907

An observational study of mortality on bison farms in Saskatchewan with special emphasis on malignant catarrhal fever.

2016· article· en· W2468568907 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tasha Epp, Cheryl Waldner, Murray R. Woodbury

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicVector-Borne Animal Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHerdIncidence (geometry)GeographyDemographyVeterinary medicineGynecologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In December 2011, the Malignant Catarrhal Fever (MCF) Task Force in Saskatchewan recommended that research be conducted on the relationship between the proximity of bison and sheep under typical commercial production settings and bison deaths due to MCF. The objective of this study was to evaluate all causes of death in bison herds and compare the incidence of MCF in herds at varying distances of exposure from sheep operations. Necropsies were completed on 76 of 133 bison reported to have died during the 18-month study period. A total of 7 MCF deaths was reported from 2 large herds within 1.0 km of sheep operations. Although there was a greater risk of MCF deaths in bison herds within 1.0 km of sheep operations than in herds more than 1.0 km away, the overall incidence of MCF deaths within the study period was very low. Most deaths were attributed to non-infectious causes, including copper deficiency.

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 score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.147 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVector-Borne Animal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207