Cardiac weights and weight ratios as indicators of cardiac lesions in pigs: A study of pig hearts from an Ontario abattoir.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinically healthy pigs used in research are assumed to have normal cardiac structure and function. Subclinical cardiac abnormalities may adversely affect the responses being measured in these experiments. The gross and histologic lesions observed in hearts collected from a Canadian abattoir between 2012 and 2015 indicated an unexpectedly high prevalence of cardiac abnormalities: 75% (297/396) of the hearts examined had such lesions. The ratios of total heart weight to body weight and of right ventricle weight to body weight were significantly greater for the hearts with lesions than for the hearts with no lesions, which suggests that cardiac remodeling, particularly hypertrophy, had occurred. The large percentage of hearts with cardiac remodeling from asymptomatic market pigs demonstrates an increased probability that subclinical cardiac abnormalities may exist in research pigs, especially those accessed through commercial channels. Researchers should be aware of this likelihood if subclinical cardiac abnormalities could adversely affect their experimental findings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".