Statistical agreement of gonioscopy performed as a puppy and as an adult in the Samoyed dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To assess whether gonioscopy performed on Samoyed puppies (6–14 weeks of age) is a reliable predictor of their gonioscopy results as adults (>11 months of age). Procedure A retrospective medical record search was performed to identify Samoyed dogs that had undergone gonioscopy as a puppy (6–14 weeks of age). A second prospective gonioscopy examination was performed as an adult (>11 months of age) and the results were compared. Gonioscopy was assessed on two characteristics: percent of iridocorneal angle (ICA) unaffected by pectinate ligament abnormalities (PLA) and ICA width, with PLA results categorized into unaffected (75% open), moderately affected (50%–74% open), and severely affected (<50% open) and the width categorized into wide, moderate, narrow, and closed groups. A multivariate model was created that considered factors such as PLA, angle width, sex, puppy age, neuter status, and time between examinations. Results The eyes of 77 Samoyed dogs (154 eyes) met inclusion criteria. When assessing PLA, 90% of dogs had the same categorization as a puppy and as an adult. When assessing ICA width, 53.2% of dogs had the same width classification as a puppy and as an adult. There is strong evidence that variation between puppy and adult results increases with time between examination (p = .03). Conclusion Puppies unaffected by PLA and with a wide ICA angle, are likely to retain these features as adults. Selection of puppies with desirable gonioscopic traits may help breeders to choose dogs likely to retain these traits as adults for breeding. This may reduce the incidence of glaucoma in the breed. Puppy examinations should be performed in both eyes. Examination of adults prior to breeding remains prudent.
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 | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".