Cranial cruciate ligament disease is perceived to be prevalent and is misunderstood in field trial sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cranial cruciate ligament disease (CCLD) is the most prevalent orthopedic problem in canines, affecting 3% to 5% of dogs, causing stifle instability, mobility dysfunction, and pain. The objective of this study was to evaluate the American Kennel Club field trial community's knowledge of CCLD and estimate its perceived prevalence within this population. SAMPLE: 401 field trial participants responded, with 701 field trial canines reported. METHODS: A survey instrument was emailed to a population of Retriever field trial participants to collect information on perceptions and experience with CCLD and current canine participants. Analyses included descriptive statistics, multiple logistic regression, and χ2 tests (significant at P < .05). RESULTS: The majority of respondents appropriately identified the connection between genetics and CCLD (69%). There was under-recognition (6%) of the degenerative nature of the disease, with 61% inappropriately identifying trauma as the major cause. Respondents also indicated that a CCLD diagnosis in a dog's sibling or offspring affected their breeding decisions less than a diagnosis in their parents, indicating a misunderstanding of genetics. More than half of respondents indicated prior experiences with CCLD. The reported occurrence of CCLD was found to be 12% (72/610) in field trial Labrador Retrievers. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is a lack of knowledge in the field trial community regarding CCLD. This population showed a higher owner-perceived occurrence of CCLD compared to data collected from medical records. Further investigation is warranted to validate the true prevalence of CCLD in field trial Retrievers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".