MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280521398 · doi:10.3168/jds.2021-21552

Effect of plane of nutrition and analgesic drug treatment on wound healing and pain following cautery disbudding in preweaning dairy calves

2022· article· en· W4280521398 on OpenAlexafffund
Cassandra N. Reedman, T.F. Duffield, T.J. DeVries, K. Lissemore, Sarah Adcock, Cassandra B. Tucker, S.D. Parsons, Charlotte B. Winder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Agri-Food Innovation AllianceUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsMeloxicamMedicineAnalgesicLidocaineMefenamic acidHaptoglobinWound healingAnesthesiaNociceptionSurgeryInternal medicinePharmacologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of a biologically normal plane of nutrition compared with a limited plane on the primary outcome wound healing, and one dose of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) compared with 2 on the secondary outcomes: lying behavior, haptoglobin concentrations, and mechanical nociceptive threshold (MNT) in calves disbudded via cautery iron. Eighty female Holstein calves were enrolled at birth, individually housed, and fed via a Calf Rail system (Förster Technik). A 2 × 2 factorial design was used to assess the effect of plane of nutrition and an additional NSAID. Calves were randomly assigned to a biologically normal plane of nutrition (BN; offered up to 15 L/d) or a limited plane (LP; offered up to 6 L/d) and to receive one or 2 doses of meloxicam. All calves received a lidocaine cornual nerve block and a subcutaneous injection of meloxicam 15 min before cautery disbudding at 18 to 25 d of age, and half the calves received an additional injection of meloxicam (0.5 mg/kg) 3 d after disbudding. Tissue type present, wound diameter, and wound depth were evaluated 2 times per week for 7 to 8 wk as measures of wound healing, lying behavior was recorded beginning 1 to 2 wk before disbudding until 7 to 8 wk after as a behavioral indicator of pain, haptoglobin concentrations were measured once per day for 7 d after disbudding, and MNT was evaluated 2 times/wk for 3 wk. Survival analyses were analyzed using Cox regression models (wound healing) and continuous data were analyzed using mixed-effect linear regression models. Only 12% of horn buds were completely healed by 7 to 8 wk after disbudding and 54% had re-epithelized at this time. At any time, wounds from BN calves were more likely to have had re-epithelization occur compared with wounds from LP calves (hazard ratio: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.18-3.14). Wounds from calves that received only one dose of NSAID were more likely to have re-epithelization occur, compared with wounds from calves given 2 doses (hazard ratio: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.15-3.05). Wounds from BN calves had smaller diameters and depths over time beginning on wk 3 compared with LP calves. Wounds from calves that received an additional NSAID had larger diameters and depths over time beginning on wk 4 and 3 respectively, compared with calves that only received one dose of NSAID. Calves that received an extra NSAID tended to be less sensitive 7, 10, and 17 d after disbudding compared with calves that only received one dose and spent less time lying in the week after disbudding. Calves on the BN milk program were more active compared with LP calves with lower lying times, fewer lying bouts per day, and longer average lying bouts. Our results indicate that a BN milk feeding program for calves can result in faster healing times and more activity, and that providing an extra NSAID 3 d after disbudding appears to slow the healing process but may result in less pain experienced by the calf 1 to 2 wk after the procedure. This study is also among the first to demonstrate that after the complete removal of the horn bud, wounds can take more than 8 weeks to re-epithelize and fully heal.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicVeterinary Equine Medical ResearchFrench-language works237,207