MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982380460 · doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2019.809.086

Epidemiological Studies on Canine Microfilariosis due to Dirofilaria repens in and around Mangalore- a Coastal Region of Karnataka

2019· article· en· W2982380460 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. S. Malatesh, C. Ansar Kamran, K. J. Ananda, Ganesh Udupa, Karthikeyan Ramesh, P. T. Suguna Rao, N. B. Shridhar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParasitic Diseases Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofilariaDirofilaria repensBreedVeterinary medicineEpidemiologyRepensMedicineBiologyFilariasisHelminthsPathologyAnimal scienceDirofilaria immitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was conducted to ascertain the epidemiology of canine microfilariosis in and around Mangalore a coastal region of Karnataka for a period of one year from March-2018 to February-2019. A total of 214 blood samples were collected from dogs suspected for microfilariosis and were screened for microfilaria by modified knott's method. Among 214 samples screened, 95 samples were found positive for microfilaria with an overall prevalence of 44.39 per cent. The species of microfilaria was identified as D. repens based on the morphology and micrometry. Age wise prevalence was found highest in adult dogs and least in puppies. During the study, highest prevalence was observed during North-east monsoon season from October to December months (71.42%). The breed wise prevalence showed highest in Labrador, followed by Doberman and Golden retriever dogs. The gender wise prevalence was found higher in males (71.05%) than females. The infection was found more in dogs kept outdoor as well as near drainage area.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied SciencesSame topicParasitic Diseases Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207