Effects of injectable dexmedetomidine-ketamine-midazolam and isoflurane inhalation anesthetic protocols on ocular variables in captive black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: ; BTPDs). ANIMALS: 9 zoo-kept BTPDs. PROCEDURES: The BTPDs received dexmedetomidine hydrochloride (0.25 mg/kg, IM), ketamine hydrochloride (40 mg/kg, IM), and midazolam hydrochloride (1.5 mg/kg, IM) or inhalation of isoflurane and oxygen in a randomized complete crossover design (2-day interval between anesthetic episodes). Pupil size, globe position, tear production, and intraocular pressure measurements were recorded at 5, 30, and 45 minutes after induction of anesthesia. For each BTPD, a phenol red thread test was performed in one randomly selected eye and a modified Schirmer tear test I was performed in the other eye. Intraocular pressure was measured by rebound tonometry. RESULTS: Compared with findings for the DKM protocol, pupil size was smaller at all time points when the BTPDs underwent the ISO protocol. Globe position remained central during anesthesia with the DKM protocol, whereas it varied among central, ventromedial, and ventrolateral positions during anesthesia with the ISO protocol. Tear production and intraocular pressure decreased significantly over time when the BTPDs underwent either protocol. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results indicated that ophthalmic examination findings for anesthetized BTPDs can be influenced by the anesthetic protocol used. The DKM protocol may result in more consistent pupil size and globe position, compared with that achieved by use of the ISO protocol. Tear production and intraocular pressure measurements should be conducted promptly after induction of anesthesia to avoid the effect of anesthetic episode duration on these variables.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".