Impact of Digit Amputation on Dogs Competing in Agility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives This work sought to determine the prognosis for dogs for return to athletic function in canine agility competitions after digit amputation. Materials and Methods Data were collected using an Internet-based survey of owners of agility dogs with digit disorders that required amputation. Signalment and physical characteristics were compared between dogs with traumatic and nontraumatic disorders. Athletic performance before and after amputation was assessed subjectively by owner opinion and objectively for eight dogs using competition performance records. Results Problems leading to digit amputation in 46 dogs included acute or chronic traumatic lesions (30 dogs), infection (7 dogs), neoplasia (7 dogs), and cystic lesions (2 dogs). There were no differences in signalment or physical characteristics between dogs with traumatic and nontraumatic disorders. Of the 46 dogs, 39 (84.7%) had returned to agility at the time of the survey and 94.6% of the owners (37/39) were satisfied with performance after amputation. No dog failed to return to agility as a result of the digit disorder or amputation. There was no difference in mean competition speed before and after amputation. Clinical Significance Most agility dogs undergoing digit amputation perform satisfactorily after surgery, although modifications to performance criteria may be appropriate for some.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".