Release Rates and Complications for Birds of Prey With Antebrachial Fractures at a Veterinary Teaching Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A retrospective case series that included 253 free-ranging birds of prey admitted to a rehabilitation center was conducted to describe the treatment and outcome of antebrachial fractures. Medical records from birds of prey belonging to 21 species admitted with antebrachial fracture between 1989 and 2015 at the University of California, Davis, were reviewed. Species distribution on admission, treatment, outcome, and complications were described by fracture category and species. Among 134 birds treated after initial triage on the day of admission, 4 bone/ wing categories were identified: 83 birds had an ulnar fracture only; 18 birds had a radial fracture only; 28 birds had a concomitant fracture of the radius and ulna on the same wing; and 5 birds had bilateral antebrachial fractures. Logistic regressions were performed to determine which factors were associated with a positive outcome within each of these 4 categories. Among birds having only an ulnar fracture, those with a closed fracture were significantly more likely to be released than birds with open fractures (P = .03; odds ratio = 5.43, 95% confidence interval: 1.29–28.12). In addition, birds with a fracture of the middle third of the ulna were significantly more likely to be released than birds diagnosed with a single fracture of the proximal third of the ulna (P = .02; odds ratio = 4.54, 95% confidence interval: 1.35–16.64). No significant prognostic factor was detected in other fracture categories.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".