MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024271226

Endoparasite control practices on Saskatchewan dairy farms.

2019· article· en· W3024271226 on OpenAlexaffabout
Haley Scott, Murray Jelinski, Chris Luby, Fabienne D. Uehlinger

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicHelminth infection and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthelminticVeterinary medicineGeographyBiologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A questionnaire was administered to dairy producers in Saskatchewan in 2016 to determine basic pasture management practices, how producers use parasite control products, and attitudes towards the threat of endoparasites. All 161 dairy producers in Saskatchewan were invited to participate and the survey response rate was 39.8% (64/161). Most respondents (78.3%) were not concerned with endoparasites in their cattle or the threat of anthelmintic resistance. Yet 79.7% of producers reported using anthelmintics in all classes of cattle (lactating cows, dry cows, weaned heifers, and bred heifers). The most common reasons for using an anthelmintic product were as part of a routine management strategy and for the control of external parasites. The most common method to determine dosage was by visual estimation of the animal's weight. Together, these factors may increase the risk for development of anthelmintic resistance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.004

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHelminth infection and controlFrench-language works237,207