MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282915384

Description and validation of a new descriptive and multiparametric numeric rating scale to assess sedation in cats.

2022· article· en· W4282915384 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley-Ann Rutherford, Andrea Sánchez, Gabrielle Monteith, Tainor Tisotti, Rodrigo Aguilera, Alexander Valverde

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSedationVisual analogue scaleInter-rater reliabilityMedicineReliability (semiconductor)KappaRating scaleScale (ratio)SedativePhysical therapyAnesthesiaStatisticsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 0.001). This scale demonstrated internal consistency and sensitivity even when evaluating drugs or doses with minimal sedative effects and there was very strong interrater reliability, independent of experience level. Based on this clinical study, we concluded that the use of this sedation scale is appropriate when objective numerical sedation quantification is required, in either a clinical or research setting.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207