MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741895788 · doi:10.1111/jsap.12717

The lack of analgesic use (oligoanalgesia) in small animal practice

2017· review· en· W2741895788 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Small Animal Practice · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnalgesicCurriculumPain managementContinuing educationIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaNursingMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oligoanalgesia is defined as failure to provide analgesia in patients with acute pain. Treatment of pain in emergencies, critical care and perioperatively may influence patient outcomes: the harmful practice of withholding analgesics occurs in teaching hospitals and private practices and results in severe physiological consequences. This article discusses the prevalence, primary causes, species and regional differences and ways to avoid oligoanalgesia in small animal practice. Oligoanalgesia may be addressed by improving education on pain management in the veterinary curriculum, providing continuing education to veterinarians and implementing pain scales.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.470
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.027 · 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