MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302282012 · doi:10.1111/evj.13879

Risk factors for insidious uveitis in the Knabstrupper breed

2022· article· en· W4302282012 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole B. Kingsley, Lynne S Sandmeyer, Sarah Parker, Ann E. Dwyer, Sanna Heden, Camilla Reilly, Anna Hallendar‐Edman, Sheila Archer, Rebecca R. Bellone

Bibliographic record

VenueEquine Veterinary Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicLeptospirosis research and findings
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUC Davis Center for Equine HealthMorris Animal Foundation
KeywordsOdds ratioMedicineUveitisBreedRisk factorInternal medicineLogistic regressionImmunologyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Equine recurrent uveitis (ERU) is the leading cause of blindness for horses; previous research implicated the leopard complex spotting allele (LP) as a genetic risk factor for insidious uveitis in the Appaloosa. There is limited information about risk in the Knabstrupper. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical manifestations, disease frequency and potential risk factors for ERU in Knabstrupper horses. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Ocular examinations were performed on 116 horses, and based on identified anomalies, horses were classified as suspect, ERU-affected or having no clinical signs. Microagglutination testing (MAT) of serum assessed exposure to Leptospira spp. Clinical signs, age, sex, base colour, coat pattern, LP and PATN1 genotypes, percent white at birth, progressive roaning and Leptospira were assessed as risk factors using multivariable exact logistic regression, accounting for clustering at the barn level. Additionally, a pedigree analysis was performed (n = 20 cases and 21 controls), and coefficients of coancestry (CC) and inbreeding were calculated. RESULTS: Prevalence of insidious uveitis in this sample of Knabstruppers was 20.7%. Similar to findings for Appaloosas, LP homozygotes had higher odds of uveitis compared with true solid (N/N) horses (LP/LP OR = 7.64, 95% CI [0.8 to +INF], p = 0.04) and age was also identified as a risk factor. After accounting for LP, the 16-20 age group had higher odds compared with the youngest group (OR = 13.36, 95% CI [1.4-213.4], p = 0.009). The distributions of average CC were significantly different between cases and controls (p = 0.01). MAIN LIMITATIONS: A relatively small sample size decreased the power for detecting additional associations. The progressive nature of insidious uveitis may have prevented identification of younger affected horses. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support genotyping for LP to assess risk of ERU in Knabstruppers. Additional studies are necessary to develop more robust risk models across LP breeds for earlier detection and improved clinical management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEquine Veterinary JournalSame topicLeptospirosis research and findingsFrench-language works237,207