MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564272527 · doi:10.1111/vsu.12593

Evaluation of a scoring system based on conformation factors to predict cranial cruciate ligament disease in Labrador Retrievers

2016· article· en· W2564272527 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dominique J. Griffon, Devin P. Cunningham, Wanda J. Gordon‐Evans, Rei Tanaka, Kenneth A. Bruecker, Randy J. Boudrieau

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCruciate ligamentPredictive valueContingency tableRadiographyScoring systemAnterior cruciate ligamentInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of a radiographic score derived from tibial plateau angle (TPA) and femoral anteversion (FAA) with an outcome of cranial cruciate ligament deficiency (CCLD) in large dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. ANIMALS: 167 Labrador Retrievers. METHODS: Hind limbs of sound Labrador Retrievers over 6 years of age were considered at low risk for CCLD. Limbs were considered high risk for CCLD if they were affected or predisposed (sound contralateral limb in dogs with unilateral CCLD). The radiographic CCLD score was calculated for each limb. The TPA, FAA, and CCLD scores were compared between limbs of the same dog and between risk categories. A contingency table was used to evaluate the association of the CCLD score with the CCLD status of limbs. RESULTS: TPA, FAA, and CCLD scores were greater in limbs categorized as high risk for CCLD than in normal limbs. The sensitivity and specificity of the CCLD score was 87% and 79%, respectively. The positive predictive value was 69% and the negative predictive value was 92%. Scores were similar between paired right and left limbs, but did not agree for predicted status in 14/106 dogs. DISCUSSION: Our study supports an association between TPA, FAA, and CCLD in Labrador Retrievers. The negative predictive value of the CCLD score supports its application for screening dogs considered at low risk for CCLD. Positive CCLD scores should be interpreted with caution and the status of a dog may be undetermined if scores obtained on each limb disagree.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary SurgerySame topicVeterinary Orthopedics and NeurologyFrench-language works237,207