MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244724912 · doi:10.4081/vsd.2011.2

Blood glucose and liver function in dogs administered a xylitol drinking water additive at zero, one and five times dosage rates

2011· article· en· W4244724912 on OpenAlexaff
James Anthony, Lynn P. Weber, Stan Alkemade

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Science Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXylitolHypoglycemiaPlaceboMedicineBlood sugarAnimal scienceChemistryFood scienceInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiologyDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was designed to determine the safety of a drinking water additive that reduces plaque and calculus in dogs, and contains xylitol as an active ingredient. The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed in 15 crossbred dogs that were randomly divided into three groups and had their drinking water treated for 14 days with either: i) a commercial health care product (BreathaLyser Plus) at the recommended dosage, ii) an experimental health care product (BreathaLyser Plus containing five times the amount of xylitol), or iii) a placebo of purified water with a colour additive. Results demonstrated that the continuous administration of a commercial, drinking water, oral health product containing xylitol, at one and five times the normal inclusion rate, does not cause hypoglycemia or alter liver function in dogs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary Science DevelopmentSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207