Three-dimensional kinematics of the craniocervical junction of Cavalier King Charles Spaniels compared to Chihuahuas and Labrador retrievers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our knowledge about the underlying pathomechanisms of craniocervical junction abnormalities (CCJA) in dogs mostly derives from measurements based on tomographic imaging. These images are static and the positioning of the dogs' head does not reflect the physiological in vivo position of the craniocervical junction (CCJ). Aberrant motion patterns and ranges of motion (ROM) in sound individuals of CCJA predisposed breeds may be a pathogenetic trigger. To further extend our limited knowledge of physiological motion of the CCJ, this prospective, comparative study investigates the in vivo motion patterns and ROM of the CCJ in walk and trot in sound Cavalier King Charles Spaniels and Chihuahuas. The Labrador retriever is used as a reference breed without predisposition for CCJA. This is the first detailed description of CCJ movement of trotting dogs. Biplanar fluoroscopy images, recorded in walking and trotting dogs, were matched to a virtual reconstruction of the skull and cranial cervical spine utilising Scientific Rotoscoping. Kinematic data reveal the same motion patterns among all breeds and gaits with individual temporal and spatial differences in each dog. A stride cycle-dependent lateral rotation of the cranial cervical spine and axial rotation of the atlantoaxial joint in trot in dogs is described for the first time. The ROM of the atlantoaxial and atlantooccipital joints in walk and trot were not statistically significantly greater in the CCJA-predisposed breeds CKCS and Chihuahua. ROM values of all translational and rotational degrees of freedom were larger in walk than trot, although this is only statistically significant for the atlantoaxial joint. Until proven otherwise, a more species-specific than breed-specific general motion pattern of the CCJ in walking and trotting, clinically sound dogs must be assumed. Species-specific anatomic properties of the CCJ seem to supersede breed-specific anatomical differences in clinically sound 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".