The effect of per os vs subcutaneous 123iodine administration on percentage thyroidal radioactive iodine uptake in normal cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Historical and recent literature disagree on whether a higher PO 131I dosage, compared to IV or SC routes, is required for successful resolution of spontaneous hyperthyroidism in cats, necessitating investigation into the effect of PO and injectable radioactive iodine administration on % thyroidal radioactive iodine uptake (RAIU). Hypothesis/Objectives To investigate the effect of PO and SC routes of 123I administration on paired % thyroidal RAIU in euthyroid cats. Specifically, a 1.5-fold difference (50% relative change) was hypothesized, which in absolute terms can be expressed as a 3.25% increase in the mean %RAIU of 7.04% after PO 123I administration to 10.56% after SC dosing. Animals Seven healthy euthyroid teaching-research colony cats. Methods A randomized, radiologist-blinded crossover study comparing %RAIU after PO and SC 123I administration. Results Percentage thyroidal RAIU values (mean ± SD; 95% confidence interval) after PO (4.81% ± 1.63%; 3.30%-6.23%) and SC (5.26% ± 2.43%; 3.01%-7.51%) 123I administration were associated with a median within-pair absolute difference of 0.2% (range: min, 0.1%-max, 4.9%). Statistical significance was not achieved (P = .45). Six of 7 cats had a within-pair absolute difference of 0.1% to 0.9% (relative change of 4%-20%), but a single outlier cat had a within-pair absolute difference of 4.9% (relative change of 108%). Conclusions and Clinical Importance This study did not detect an effect of 123I administration route on paired % thyroidal RAIU in euthyroid cats. However, a type 2 statistical error due to small sample size is possible.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".