MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990694886 · doi:10.3390/ani9121053

Horse Welfare During Equine Chorionic Gonadotropin (eCG) Production

2019· review· en· W2990694886 on OpenAlexaff
X Vilanova, Nancy De Briyne, Bonnie V. Beaver, Patricia V. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHorseEquine chorionic gonadotropinProduction (economics)WelfareHuman chorionic gonadotropinInternal medicineMedicineBiologyOvulationEconomicsHormoneMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collection of blood from pregnant mares for extraction of equine chorionic gonadotropin (eCG) is a critical but relatively unknown and poorly regulated practice in the countries in which it occurs. Equine chorionic gonadotropin is a hormone that is widely used to enhance reproductive performance and management of dairy and beef cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs kept under intensive housing systems. eCG is extracted from the blood of brood mares between days 40-120 of gestation. Although alternatives have been sought, there is currently no efficacious replacement, natural or synthetic, for eCG. Recently, several animal welfare organizations have voiced concerns over the condition and treatment of pregnant mares kept for eCG production in some countries. Animal welfare issues may arise if mares are bled too frequently or if too much blood is collected at any time. In addition, these mares tend to be managed extensively on pastures with minimal veterinary oversight and they may be poorly desensitized and habituated to handling and other practices. This can lead to serious injuries and even death when mares are brought in for bleeding. This paper reviews the process of blood collection for eCG extraction and provides recommendations for ensuring mare welfare.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations53
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicVeterinary Equine Medical ResearchFrench-language works237,207