MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377047344 · doi:10.3168/jds.2022-22795

Graduate Student Literature Review: The problem of calf mortality on dairy farms

2023· review· en· W4377047344 on OpenAlexafffund
S.G. Umaña Sedó, Charlotte B. Winder, D.L. Renaud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsStandardizationWelfareMortality rateDairy cattleEnvironmental healthMedicineBiologyAnimal scienceComputer scienceSurgeryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calf mortality can be used as an indicator of animal health and welfare on dairy farms. However, several challenges surround the estimation and reporting of this metric, specifically: (1) lack of records or reliable data, (2) methods of data collection, and (3) inconsistencies in calculation and definitions used. Therefore, despite its importance, the lack of consensus on a definition of calf mortality makes it difficult to compare mortality rates between dairy farms or studies. Monitoring factors associated with calf mortality is vital to create preventative strategies. Although common strategies have been set about how to raise dairy calves and manage dairy calves, discrepancies among studies evaluating factors associated with calf mortality still exist. This review summarizes research on the evaluation of calf mortality and associated risk factors, specifically, the lack of reliable data and standardization of the definition of calf mortality. In addition, current strategies to monitor and prevent calf mortality will be presented in this review.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207