MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997242319 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2019.00424

Goniometric Assessment in French Bulldogs

2019· article· en· W2997242319 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maíra Rezende Formenton, Lidiane Gonçalves de Lima, Flávia Gardilin Vassalo, Jean Guilherme Fernandes Joaquim, Laryssa Petrocini Rosseto, Denise Tabacchi Fantoni

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGoniometerTarsus (eyelids)MedicineRange of motionInclination angleRadiographyOrthodonticsTarsal JointElbowHip flexionAnatomyPhysical therapySurgeryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Goniometry is a low-cost, user-friendly and widely available technique used by different veterinary medicine professionals to estimate joint range of motion (ROM). Studies providing breed-specific reference ranges for goniometric measurements are scarce and there is a lack of information regarding joint angles in French Bulldogs. This prospective study set out to determine normal ROM for the carpus, elbow, shoulder, tarsus, stifle and hip joints in healthy, adult French Bulldogs using goniometry. We hypothesized ROM would be similar in this and other dog breeds. Twenty dogs met the inclusion criteria. Sample size was calculated using power analysis based on previous studies. Goniometric measurements were made by a single examiner. Limbs were measured in random order and three measurements made per joint. Dogs were not sedated. Joint angles measured in French Bulldogs in this study were similar to those reported in Labrador Retrievers (shoulder, carpal, and tarsal flexion), Rottweilers (shoulder, carpus, and hip flexion), and Dachshunds (hip, stifle, and tarsal flexion). Similar flexion angles and ROM were detected in right and left limb joints. Findings of this study suggest similar ROM in French Bulldogs and other dog breeds. Lack of radiographic assessment and the fact that goniometric measurements were made by a single examiner were the major limitations of this study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicVeterinary Orthopedics and NeurologyFrench-language works237,207