MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137855083 · doi:10.21423/aabppro20163499

Diagnostic accuracy of clinical illness for bovine respiratory disease diagnosis in feedlot beef calves

2016· article· en· W3137855083 on OpenAlexaff
Edouard Timsit, Nandini Dendukuri, Ian Schiller, Sébastien Buczinski

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Association of Bovine Practitioners Conference Proceedings · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMicrobial infections and disease research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBovine respiratory diseaseFeedlotMedicineBeef cattleDiagnostic testAnimal scienceVeterinary medicineBiologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) diagnosis in feedlots is based on clinical inspection (CI) done once or twice daily by pen-riders or pen-walkers. A diagnosis of BRD is typically established when an animal has visual signs of BRD and a rectal temperature above a threshold (ranging from 103.1 to 104 °F) (39.5 to 40 °C). This diagnostic approach is known to have less than ideal sensitivity (SeCI) and specificity (SpCI). However, accurate estimates of SeCI and SpCI are not available, in part due to the absence of a reference test for antemortem diagnosis of BRO. The objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CI for BRO diagnosis in post-weaned beef calves. The presence of lung lesions at slaughter (LU) was used as an imperfect reference test to determine SeCI and SpCI.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Association of Bovine Practitioners Conference ProceedingsSame topicMicrobial infections and disease researchFrench-language works237,207