MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281999737 · doi:10.1111/vop.13002

A review of investigated risk factors for developing equine recurrent uveitis

2022· review· en· W4281999737 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole B. Kingsley, Lynne S Sandmeyer, Rebecca R. Bellone

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Ophthalmology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and Retrovirus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMorris Animal Foundation
KeywordsDiseaseEtiologyMedicineUveitisBlindnessIntensive care medicineImmunologyBioinformaticsPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equine recurrent uveitis (ERU) is an ocular inflammatory disease that can be difficult to manage clinically. As such, it is the leading cause of bilateral blindness for horses. ERU is suspected to have a complex autoimmune etiology with both environmental and genetic risk factors contributing to onset and disease progression in some or all cases. Work in recent years has aimed at unraveling the primary triggers, such as infectious agents and inherited breed-specific risk factors, for disease onset, persistence, and progression. This review has aimed at encompassing those factors that have been associated, implicated, or substantiated as contributors to ERU, as well as identifying areas for which additional knowledge is needed to better understand risk for disease onset and progression. A greater understanding of the risk factors for ERU will enable earlier detection and better prognosis through prevention and new therapeutics.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary OphthalmologySame topicT-cell and Retrovirus StudiesFrench-language works237,207