Equine Asthma: Current Understanding and Future Directions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2019 Havemeyer Workshop brought together researchers and clinicians to discuss the latest information on Equine Asthma and provide future research directions. Current clinical and molecular asthma phenotypes and endotypes in humans were discussed and compared to asthma phenotypes in horses. The role of infectious and non-infectious causes of equine asthma, genetic factors and proposed disease pathophysiology were reviewed. Diagnostic limitations were evident by the limited number of tests and biomarkers available to field practitioners. The participants emphasized the need for more accessible, standardized diagnostics that would help identify specific phenotypes and endotypes in order to create more targeted treatments or management strategies. One important outcome of the workshop was the creation of the Equine Asthma Group that will facilitate communication between veterinary practice and research communities through published and easily accessible guidelines and foster research collaboration.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it