MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W270263800 · doi:10.17221/6309-vetmed

Canine atopic dermatitis in the Middle East: clinical signs, signalment and common allergens

2012· article· en· W270263800 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gila Zur, I. Skorinsky, Tali Bdolah‐Abram

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinární Medicína · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDermatologyAtopic dermatitisAllergyLabrador RetrieverPathologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the study was to examine for the first time the various aspects of canine atopic dermatitis (CAD) presenting in a Middle Eastern country. Medical records of 164 dogs diagnosed with CAD were evaluated. Associations between signalment, lifestyle, clinical signs and allergens were evaluated statistically. Labrador Retriever, German Shepherd dog, Boxer, French Bulldog, Golden Retriever and Shar-Pei breeds were presented more frequently than the regular hospital population (P < 0.0001), and had an earlier disease onset time (P < 0.01). In 22 dogs (13%) signs of CAD were noticed at less than six months of age. Most dogs (75%) lived indoors. Most dogs (83%) had lesions on the ventral part of the body and 68% had foot lesions. After excluding flea allergy dermatitis by implementing strict flea control, 60% of the dogs presented with dorsal distribution of skin lesions. Dogs with ventral lesions were younger when clinical signs first appeared (P < 0.05). Most of the dogs were allergic to dust and/or dust mites (75.6%), with weeds and trees as the next most common allergens. CAD is similar worldwide, but geographic differences may be attributable to genetic pools and allergen loading. This study also shows that early onset of clinical signs, especially in breeds predisposed to CAD and with a dorsal distribution of skin lesions, should not rule out the diagnosis of CAD.

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)0.001
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinární MedicínaSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207