Compensatory Changes in Ground Reaction Forces in Small and Large Breed Dogs with Unilateral Hindlimb Lameness in Comparison to Healthy Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to investigate whether small- to medium-sized dogs with a naturally occurring unilateral hindlimb lameness show the same compensatory changes in ground reaction forces as large-breed dogs and how the changes are displayed compared with healthy small- to medium-sized dogs. Study Design Small- to medium-sized dogs (n = 15) and large-breed dogs (n = 16) with unilateral rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament were examined. The kinetic parameters peak vertical force and vertical impulse of the two groups were compared with each other and compared with healthy Beagles (n = 15) and with healthy Labrador Retrievers (n = 17), respectively. Results The healthy Beagle group showed a significantly higher weight loading on the forelimbs compared with the healthy Labrador group. The affected groups in comparison with the corresponding healthy groups showed a higher load on the non-affected body half and a significant lower weight bearing on the affected limb. Comparing the two affected groups, no significant difference could be found. Conclusion Despite a substantially different initial situation regarding weight distribution of the examined small- to medium-sized dogs and large dogs, a unilateral hindlimb lameness leads to the same compensatory changes (cranial and lateral shift of the body mass centre).
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".