MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212860640 · doi:10.53607/wrb.v24.197

Pharmacokinetic Study of Non–steroidal Anti–inflammatory Drugs in Wildlife Rehabilitation Birds

2006· article· en· W4212860640 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sara Caruso, Erica Miller, Robert H. Poppenga

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Rehabilitation Bulletin · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBird parasitology and diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of PennsylvaniaGeraldine R. Dodge Foundation
KeywordsMeloxicamPharmacokineticsMedicineGoosePharmacologyDrugVeterinary medicineBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the use of non–steroidal anti–inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is common in many veterinary practices, there is little information on the efficacy and appropriate dosage levels in avian species. This study examined the pharmacokinetics of one NSAID, meloxicam, given orally to wild birds undergoing rehabilitation. Meloxicam was administered at 1 mg/kg. The primary species studied was Canada goose, but red–tailed hawk was included as a comparison between these species of birds. After administration of meloxicam, blood samples were taken at a series of time intervals to determine the concentration of drug in the serum over time. The study concluded that 1 mg/kg is an appropriate dosage but should be administered twice daily instead of once a day due to the elimination rate in Canada geese. These results suggest that red–tailed hawks absorb and eliminate meloxicam at a different rate, but additional studies are needed to confirm this finding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife Rehabilitation BulletinSame topicBird parasitology and diseasesFrench-language works237,207