Atlas of Diagnostic Radiology of the Horse: Diseases of the Front and Hind Limbs, 2nd Edition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The material in this 2nd edition was presented in 2 separate volumes in the 1st edition. The 2nd edition contains approximately 50% new material and is arranged in a series of sections in which the different parts of the fore and hind limbs are discussed. A total of 682 cases are presented. Typically, each case is accompanied by a number of illustrations with a short paragraph, or so, of text explaining the abnormalities. Frequent use is made of line diagrams, often with annotation to clarify the abnormalities. No references are provided. There are some comments made in the text for which it would be interesting to have supporting data; for example, on page 22, various shapes of the navicular bone are described and are said to be genetically determined and that certain shapes have a greater susceptibility to the development of navicular disease. The section describing the radiographic lesions observed in navicular disease is particularly good. The criteria for the diagnosis of navicular disease are presented as a series of cases, each illustrating different features, and described as being significant changes that are present in some sound horses, mainly lame horses, or always lame horses. In several sections, summary schematic diagrams located at the end of the section illustrate the abnormalities presented. A very good series of cases illustrating the variability in the normal and abnormal development of the common sites of osteochondrosis in the stifle and hock are presented. Several cases illustrate the use that can be made of contrast studies in joints and bursal structures. The comments on the back cover of the text suggest that clear descriptions of the diagnosis and differential diagnoses are given. This is certainly true with respect to the radiographic diagnoses, where clear but brief descriptions are given. This is less true for the differential diagnoses. In most cases, the differential diagnoses are determined by comparison of the cases in the same section. Essentially, there is no text to explain why a specific diagnosis was made. For example, figure 116 illustrates ischemic necrosis of the 1st phalanx in a foal without any explanation as to how this is differentiated from infection. The book is printed on good quality glossy paper. Overall, the quality of the illustrations is good. However, in a relative minority of illustrations, the quality is poorer. In some of the cases with less obvious radiographic lesions, line diagrams accompanied the images. In most cases the lines were helpful, but in some cases, for example figure 41, the lines did not help one in observing the lesions on the radiograph. This degree of range in illustration quality is to be expected in an atlas of this nature. Occasional typographical and grammatical errors were encountered, but these minor defects do not significantly detract from the overall quality of the text. This volume is appropriate for practising equine clinicians and for residents in radiology and surgery for both systematic study and for reference. Most radiologists will be familiar with the majority of the material but will find it a useful reference text, as there are a number of pearls that make its purchase worthwhile. The 2nd edition contains sufficient new material to justify its purchase by those who already own the 1st edition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.157 | 0.093 |
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".