Influence of the Respiratory Cycle on Caudal Vena Cava Diameter Measured by Sonography in Healthy Foals: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Intravascular volume assessment in foals is challenging. In humans, intravascular volume status is estimated by the caudal vena cava (CVC) collapsibility index (CVC-CI) defined as (CVC diameter at maximum expiration [CVCmax] – CVC diameter at minimal inspiration [CVCmin])/CVCmax × 100%. Hypothesis/Objectives To determine whether the CVC could be sonographically measured in healthy foals, determine differences in CVCmax and CVCmin, and calculate inter- and intrarater variability between 2 examiners. We hypothesized that the CVC could be measured sonographically at the subxiphoid view and that there would be a difference between CVCmax and CVCmin values. Animals Sixty privately owned foals <1-month-old. Methods Prospective study. A longitudinal subxiphoid sonographic window in standing foals was used. The CVCmax and CVCmin were analyzed by a linear mixed effect model. Inter-rater agreement and intrarater variability were expressed by Bland-Altman and intraclass correlation coefficients, respectively. Results Measurements were attained from 58 of 60 foals with mean age of 15 ± 7.9 days and mean weight of 75.7 ± 17.7 kg. The CVCmax was significantly different from CVCmin (D = 0.515, SE = 0.031, P < 0.001). Inter-rater agreement of the CVC-CI differed by an average of −0.9% (95% limits of agreement, −12.5 to +10.7%). Intrarater variability of CVCmax was 0.540 and 0.545, of CVCmin was 0.550 and 0.594, and of CVC-CI was 0.894 and 0.853 for observers 1 and 2, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Importance These results indicate it is possible to reliably measure the CVC sonographically in healthy foals, and the CVC-CI may prove useful in assessing the intravascular volume status in hypovolemic foals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".