MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001914643 · doi:10.2460/javma.256.3.362

Tick paralysis in a free-ranging bobcat (Lynx rufus)

2020· article· en· W3001914643 on OpenAlexaff
Meredith E. Persky, Yousuf S. Jafarey, Sarah E. Christoff, Dewey D. Maddox, Stephanie A. Stowell, Terry M. Norton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBartonella species infections research
Canadian institutionsIsland Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmblyomma americanumDermacentor variabilisIxodes scapularisBiologyTickParalysisVirologyBartonellaMedicineIxodidaeSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract CASE DESCRIPTION A free-ranging male bobcat (Lynx rufus) was evaluated because of signs of pelvic limb paralysis. CLINICAL FINDINGS Physical examination of the anesthetized animal revealed tick infestation, normal mentation, and a lack of evidence of traumatic injuries. Radiography revealed no clinically relevant abnormalities. Hematologic analysis results were generally unremarkable, and serologic tests for exposure to feline coronavirus, FeLV, FIV, and Toxoplasma gondii were negative. Results of PCR assays for flea- and common tick-borne organisms other than Bartonella clarridgeiae were negative. TREATMENT AND OUTCOME Ticks were manually removed, and the patient received supportive care and fipronil treatment. The bobcat made a full recovery within 72 hours after treatment for ticks, and a presumptive diagnosis of tick paralysis was made. Identified tick species included Dermacenter variabilis, Amblyomma americanum, and Ixodes scapularis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE To the authors’ knowledge, tick paralysis has not previously been reported in felids outside Australia. This disease should be considered a differential diagnosis in felids, including exotic cats, with signs of neuromuscular disease of unknown etiopathogenesis.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Veterinary Medical AssociationSame topicBartonella species infections researchFrench-language works237,207