MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172947031 · doi:10.3168/jds.2020-19873

Modifiable management practices to improve udder health in dairy cattle during the dry period and early lactation: A scoping review

2021· review· en· W3172947031 on OpenAlexafffund
Carrie K. McMullen, Jan M. Sargeant, D.F. Kelton, Katheryn J. Churchill, Kineta S. Cousins, Charlotte B. Winder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsUdderMedicineLactationIce calvingMastitisMilkingSystematic reviewDairy cattlePsychological interventionAnimal scienceMEDLINEPregnancyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this scoping review was to characterize all available literature on modifiable management practices used during the dry period that have been evaluated for their effects on udder health in dairy cattle during the dry period and the subsequent lactation. Five databases and two conference proceedings were searched for relevant literature. Articles published in or after 1990 were eligible for inclusion. Eligible interventions or exposures were restricted to modifiable management practices; however, antimicrobial and teat sealant products were enumerated but not further characterized, as systematic reviews have been published on this topic. Other modifiable management practices were reported in 229 articles. Nutrition (n = 79), which included ration formulation and delivery (n = 44) and vitamin and mineral additives (n = 35), was the most commonly reported practice, followed by vaccines (n = 40) and modification of dry period length (n = 27). Risk of clinical mastitis (CM) was the most commonly reported outcome (n = 151); however, reporting of outcome risk periods varied widely between articles. Cure of existing intramammary infections (IMI) over the dry period (n = 40) and prevention of new IMI over the dry period (n = 54) were most commonly reported with a risk period between calving and 30 d in milk. Future systematic reviews with meta-analyses could target management practices such as nutrition, vaccines, and dry period length to quantify their effects on improving udder health during the dry period and early lactation. However, the variation in reporting of time at risk for CM and other outcomes challenges the ability of future synthesis work to inform management decisions on the basis of efficacy to cure or prevent IMI and CM. Consensus on which core outcomes should be evaluated in mastitis research and the selection of consistent risk periods for specific outcomes in animal trials is imperative.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207