MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995179649 · doi:10.1647/2018-394

Release Rates and Complications for Birds of Prey With Antebrachial Fractures at a Veterinary Teaching Hospital

2019· article· en· W2995179649 on OpenAlexaff
Claire Vergneau‐Grosset, Amy S. Kapatkin, Joanne Paul‐Murphy, David Sánchez-Migallón Guzmán, Michelle G. Hawkins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Avian Medicine and Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUlnaOdds ratioConfidence intervalMedicineClawSurgeryVeterinary medicineInternal medicineBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Avian Medicine and SurgerySame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207