Evaluation of the thermal antinociceptive effects of subcutaneous administration of butorphanol tartrate or butorphanol tartrate in a sustained-release poloxamer 407 gel formulation to orange-winged Amazon parrots (Amazona amazonica)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the thermal antinociceptive effects of butorphanol tartrate and butorphanol tartrate in a sustained-release 25% poloxamer 407 (P407) gel formulation (But-P407) in parrots. ANIMALS: ). PROCEDURES: First, butorphanol tartrate (5 mg/kg) or saline (0.9% NaCl) solution was administered IM to birds in a randomized complete crossover design. The temperature prompting a foot withdrawal response to a thermal stimulus (ie, the thermal threshold) was determined 30 minutes before (baseline) and at various points after treatment administration. Second, But-P407 (12.5 mg/kg) or P407 was administered SC in a similar crossover design. Thermal threshold was determined before and at various points after treatment administration. Third, But-P407 (12.5 mg/kg) or saline solution was administered SC and evaluated as in the second trial. Sedation was scored immediately before each time point in all 3 trials. RESULTS: In the first trial, a significant increase in thermal threshold was noted 30 minutes after butorphanol tartrate (vs saline solution) administration. No sedation was noted. In the second and third trials, no significant difference was identified between results for But-P407 and those for either control treatment (saline solution or P407). Mild sedation was noted in the second trial following But-P407 administration. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested a small but significant thermal antinociceptive effect of butorphanol tartrate lasting between 30 minutes and 1.5 hours in orange-winged Amazon parrots. No antinociceptive effect of butorphanol tartrate was demonstrated when delivered in P407. Further research is needed to evaluate the potential analgesic effects of But-P407.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".