MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968683058 · doi:10.1111/eve.13160

Quarter cracks in Thoroughbred racehorses trained in Hong Kong over a 9‐year period (2007–2015): incidence, clinical presentation, and future racing performance

2019· article· en· W2968683058 on OpenAlex
Leah McGlinchey, Paul Robinson, Bradley Porter, Anhad B. S. Sidhu, Sarah M. Rosanowski

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEquine Veterinary Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicineHoofLamenessIncidence (geometry)Presentation (obstetrics)SurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A quarter crack is a defect of the hoof wall that is caused by a combination of factors that affect the quality of the hoof horn. To date, no peer‐reviewed studies have described the incidence of quarter cracks in Thoroughbred racehorses during training. Further, there is limited information regarding the clinical presentation and racing performance following a quarter crack. Therefore, the objectives of the current study were to describe the incidence, clinical presentation and outcome of quarter cracks sustained by horses in racing and training at the Hong Kong Jockey Club. Horses with quarter cracks that required attention from a farrier and/or veterinarian were identified using farrier and veterinary clinical records. Data were described, including the affected foot, presence of lameness, treatment, reoccurrence and racing data for case and control horses. There was no significant difference between case and control horses for total career length, and the total number of starts, wins and places. Seventy‐four horses experienced at least one quarter crack during the study period, for a total of 114 quarter cracks. Half of the horses experiencing a quarter crack were not lame on presentation. Most quarter cracks occurred in the right fore (n = 56/102; 54.9%) and in a medial position (n = 90/102; 88.2%). Horses returned to racing a median of 50 days after the first treatment, for a median of 18 starts. Six horses retired due to the occurrence of a quarter crack. Although the incidence of quarter cracks in racehorses is low and the majority of horses returned to a racing career comparable to unaffected horses, the reoccurrence rate is high, putting an emphasis on ongoing hoof management and farrier care to help prevent the reoccurrence.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.383 · 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