Half a century of research on cattle foot and claw diseases: a scientometric analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to quantitatively evaluate scientific publications on cattle foot and claw diseases using the Scopus database. A combination of keywords "hoof disease AND bovine OR cattle OR cow" was used. Publications were classified according to the type, language, subject area, source title, author, affiliation, and country/territory. The documents were grouped later into thematic topics. The diseases evaluated in each study were quantified separately and in related groups, and distributed by decades. The frequencies of the thematic topics and diseases were compared by the chi-square test for adherence. In total, 642 publications were analyzed (595 articles, 46 reviews, and 1 note). Most of these papers were written in English (518). The main subject areas were Veterinary; Agricultural and Biological Sciences; and Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology. Journal of Dairy Science was the journal that published most articles in the area, with the best citations (SCImago Journal Rank = 1.21). The authors with the highest number of publications were Johann Kofler with 19, and David Nixon Logue and Jan Keith Shearer with 18 documents each. By affiliation, the institution with the highest number of publications was the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. By country or territory, the United States of America (22%), the United Kingdom (17%), Germany (11%), and Canada (10%) together accounted for 60% of the publications. The classification of the documents into thematic topics resulted in four groups: Specific hoof diseases (70%), General hoof diseases (14%), Lameness (11%), and Healthy hoof characterization (5%). Eighteen foot and claw diseases have been studied, with the following being the most frequent: digital dermatitis (17%), sole ulcer (15%), and white line disease (11%). When grouped, laminitis-related diseases represented 48% and infectious diseases represented 38% of the studies. Overall, just over half a century of research on cattle foot and claw diseases, bovine digital dermatitis is the most studied disease. Grouping related disorders revealed that laminitis-related diseases are being studied more than infectious diseases since the 1980s, from when studies on individual foot diseases in cattle increased to the detriment of studies that aimed to evaluate them as a unique problem. Our study, the first scientometric analysis in the subject area, compiles valuable information that can help researchers to develop future projects.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".