MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993207601 · doi:10.2478/jvetres-2019-0002

Occurrence and distribution of canine cutaneous mast cell tumour characteristics among predisposed breeds

2019· article· en· W2993207601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Śmiech, Wojciech Łopuszyński, Brygida Ślaska, Kamila Bulak, Agnieszka Jasik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMast cellMast (botany)Distribution (mathematics)BiologyPathologyMedicineImmunologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Breed predisposition to cutaneous mast cell tumours (MCT) in a population of dogs in Poland affected by various skin tumours was assessed, and the distribution of MCT characteristics such as histological grading, sex, age, and location, in predisposed breeds was evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The retrospective epidemiological study included 550 dogs affected by cutaneous MCTs with a reference group of 2,557 dogs diagnosed with other skin tumours. RESULTS: A univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. The risk of high-grade MCTs was the highest for Shar-Peis (OR: 26.394) and American Staffordshire Terriers (OR: 2.897). Boxers (OR: 6.619), Labrador Retrievers (OR: 2.630), French Bulldogs (OR: 2.050), Golden Retrievers (OR: 1.949), and American Staffordshire Terriers (OR: 2.592) were mainly affected by low-grade MCTs. The high risk of MCT was calculated to be at the age of 4-6 years for Labrador Retrievers (OR: 2.686) and 7-10 years for Boxers (OR: 2.956) and French Bulldogs (OR: 9.429). MCTs were significantly more often located on the trunk in French Bulldogs (OR: 4.680), American Staffordshire Terriers (OR: 2.520), and Labrador Retrievers (OR: 1.948). There was no statistically significant correlation between gender and the occurrence of MCTs in the breeds. CONCLUSIONS: The breed-predicated differences in the clinical course of MCTs suggest a genetic background for the tumours.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary ResearchSame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207