Comparison of radiographic and computed tomographic acetabular index in small-breed dogs: a preliminary study using Maltese and Shih Tzu
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
BACKGROUND: The morphometry of the acetabulum is one source of information that assists in the clinical diagnosis of the hip and influences the proper selection of a prosthesis, reducing post-operative complications such as those seen in total hip replacement (THR). However, acetabular parameters in small-breed dogs are rarely reported. OBJECTIVES: To investigate acetabular parameters using radiography and computed tomography (CT) in small-breed dogs with Maltese and Shih Tzu dogs used as model breeds. METHODS: Standard calibrated, extended hip radiographs and CT images were obtained. Subsequently, acetabular width (AW) in various directions was measured using radiography and CT, whereas acetabular depth (AD) was obtained by CT. Acetabular index (AI) is a ratio calculated from AD and AW. RESULTS: = 0.172; 31.42 ± 1.35 and 32.60 ± 1.80, respectively). Also, AI did not vary with breed, sex, or body size. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained radiographic and CT acetabular parameters could be useful as guidelines for evaluating the acetabulum of small-breed dogs in clinical practice.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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