MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Choosing the right cutoff level of milk progesterone to determine pregnancy status of dairy cows on day 21 post-breeding

2000· article· en· W283459650 on OpenAlexaff
Paul D. Carrière, Luc DesCôteaux, M. Bigras-Poulin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Bovine Practitioner · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint HyacintheUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHerdPalpationTransrectal ultrasonographyPregnancyCutoffPopulationDairy cattleObstetricsGynecologyPregnancy testAnimal scienceInternal medicineVeterinary medicineBiologySurgeryProstate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A field study was conducted between February and November 1995 in 3 Holstein dairy herds (193 inseminations) to determine the overall accuracy and usefulness of the skim milk progesterone pregnancy test on day 21 post-breeding, and to examine the effects of using different cutoff values and conception rates on predictive values of this pregnancy test. Results of the milk progesterone test were compared with pregnancy diagnosis after 25 days post-breeding using transrectal ultrasonography and palpation as a standard. The conception rate of the study population based on transrectal palpation was 42%. The relative sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the milk progesterone test at a cutoff level of 1 ng/ml were 90, 67, 66 and 90%, respectively. It is suggested that in a herd population with a conception rate of 42%, the milk progesterone test is not a good predictor of pregnancy because the proportion of false positive results was high at 19% (37 of 193). The capacity of the test to detect open cows is acceptable with an overall proportion of false negative tests of 4% (8 of 193). Because 8 of 83 cows tested negative were subsequently diagnosed pregnant by transrectal examinations, this milk progesterone test would be expected to result in a 10% probability of misdiagnosing pregnant cows as non-pregnant. If this test was applied in the field, the 1 ng/ml cutoff value would be expected to result in optimum probabilities (>90%) in predicting non-pregnancy in dairy herds with a conception rate of <50%. Herds with a conception rate >50% would not be expected to benefit as much from the test since the predictive value of a negative test is <90%. Finally, considering that a false negative diagnosis is more costly than a false positive, the optimum cutoff value was also calculated at a 3:1 ratio in favour of finding fewer false negatives. In this case, the optimum cutoff value for the herd with a 42% conception rate was 1.2 ng/ml. This study shows that the usefulness of the progesterone test relies on assessing the right cutoff level for the milk progesterone pregnancy test which relies not only on the measurement itself, but also on the expected conception rate and the ratio between false negative and false positive test results.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Bovine PractitionerSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207